Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Christopher Buckley quits National Review over Obama endorsement

posted at 4:05 pm on October 14, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

It’s hard to second-guess Lowry and Fowler without knowing how much fallout NR had absorbed from Buckley’s endorsement, but instinctively I hate this. It’d be one thing if his politics had changed, but they haven’t. Or so he says. From the endorsement column:

I’ve read Obama’s books, and they are first-rate. He is that rara avis, the politician who writes his own books. Imagine. He is also a lefty. I am not. I am a small-government conservative who clings tenaciously and old-fashionedly to the idea that one ought to have balanced budgets. On abortion, gay marriage, et al, I’m libertarian. I believe with my sage and epigrammatic friend P.J. O’Rourke that a government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take it all away.

But having a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect, President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves.

Maybe he’s being naive about that and maybe he isn’t (smart bet: he is), but either way he hasn’t repudiated conservatism, in which case what’s the argument for keeping him out of NR? His opinion was worthy enough to qualify for a weekly column and now suddenly it isn’t because on the binary choice of Obama versus McCain he’s gone the wrong way?

From today’s piece:

Within hours of my endorsement appearing in The Daily Beast it became clear that National Review had a serious problem on its hands. So the next morning, I thought the only decent thing to do would be to offer to resign my column there. This offer was accepted—rather briskly!—by Rich Lowry, NR’s editor, and its publisher, the superb and able and fine Jack Fowler. I retain the fondest feelings for the magazine that my father founded, but I will admit to a certain sadness that an act of publishing a reasoned argument for the opposition should result in acrimony and disavowal…

So, I have been effectively fatwahed (is that how you spell it?) by the conservative movement, and the magazine that my father founded must now distance itself from me. But then, conservatives have always had a bit of trouble with the concept of diversity. The GOP likes to say it’s a big-tent. Looks more like a yurt to me.

While I regret this development, I am not in mourning, for I no longer have any clear idea what, exactly, the modern conservative movement stands for. Eight years of “conservative” government has brought us a doubled national debt, ruinous expansion of entitlement programs, bridges to nowhere, poster boy Jack Abramoff and an ill-premised, ill-waged war conducted by politicians of breathtaking arrogance. As a sideshow, it brought us a truly obscene attempt at federal intervention in the Terry Schiavo case.

So, to paraphrase a real conservative, Ronald Reagan: I haven’t left the Republican Party. It left me.

The gratuitous sneer about ideological diversity, as if The Nation or Salon was any better, makes me think his political leanings are a tad more nuanced than he’s letting on, but if that’s the case then he probably shouldn’t have been given a column to begin with. Exit question: If NR’s going to do business this way, why have regular columnists at all? I’ve always thought the point of publishing someone regularly was because you so esteem their viewpoint that you’re willing to hear them out even when you disagree. That’s certainly my approach with someone like, say, Mark Steyn. If Buckley didn’t meet that standard, why not cancel him earlier and turn the back page over to reader submissions that toe the appropriate ideological line? Follow-up exit question: If Michelle makes good on her threat not to vote for McCain because she simply can’t bear to pull the lever for an amnesty shill — which is what he is, I hasten to remind you — are our readers going to desert us, too? Define the terms of the litmus test, please.

Update: Here’s Lowry’s reply at the Corner. Steyn will be back on the back page in the next issue, so there’s a silver lining.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

he was a LIB posing as a ‘libertarian conservative’.

Janos Hunyadi on October 14, 2008 at 5:56 PM

We have a LOT of those…if we could only get them to resign en mas…

TheBigOldDog on October 14, 2008 at 5:59 PM

You think he’d have a column if his name was Joe Blow? Bwahaha! That’s a good one!

TheBigOldDog on October 14, 2008 at 5:57 PM

That would be almost as silly as the idea of a one-term white junior senator from Illinois running for President.

JiangxiDad on October 14, 2008 at 6:00 PM

LOL. Great flow chart! Please send that to MM. She has a good sense of humor.

JiangxiDad on October 14, 2008 at 5:55 PM

I sent it to AP and Ed, as well as asking them to send it to Michelle, I know there are much more worthy things in the news these days.

At any rate, The fam, my girl, and my buddies got a good kick out of it.

I attacked you? Wow. Someone should call 911.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 5:55 PM

Is your tag an Oxymoron, or are you just pretending to be an immature kid that doesn’t have a decent rebuttal? The flames you tossed out here aren’t your best work. You seem to get worse with every flame war that you start.

leetpriest on October 14, 2008 at 6:00 PM

An exterme counterexample, perhaps: If the Pope announced that God doesn’t exist — a conclusion at which he arrived due to many considerations — would he still be a Catholic?

Jim Treacher on October 14, 2008 at 6:02 PM

Jim Treacher on October 14, 2008 at 6:02 PM

Why not? It seems to work for the Archbishop of Canterbury.

JiangxiDad on October 14, 2008 at 6:04 PM

The republicans who voted for John McCain did so of their own free will and had nothing to do with what the New York Times did.

And I’ll give you a lesson for yourself:

Stop b*tching about the outcome of the republican primary because the people spoke. They decided on who our candidate would be. If you don’t like the outcome, then invent a time machine soyou can go back and change it so your candidate won with more votes. Until then, you sound like a whining little boy who can’t accept the fact that things don’t go your way and you are going to stand in the middle of the store and shriek as all the others look on at you in a mixture of pity and disgust.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 5:26 PM

wise_man, I’m forever amused by the irony of your name. Let me put things simply for you. Republicans made a mistake in the nomination process hence the need to learn lessons from the scene of rubble before us. Your time machine reference made me laugh because you seem to be unable to grasp the concept that history often repeats itself. As a result, learning from your mistakes is sort of like having a time machine because at some point you end up back where you started and once again come face to face with the same decisions. As if you had a time machine, you can have the opportunity to right previous wrongs. So yeah, I laughed at your stupid time machine reference. But then I cried because I realized the monumental task before us which is to teach people like you how very wrong you are. At some point along the way you were brainwashed by liberals to think that the true path to “victory” is to become more like them, although, in your case I suspect only a light rinse was required.

Zetterson on October 14, 2008 at 6:05 PM

Follow-up exit question: If Michelle makes good on her threat not to vote for McCain because she simply can’t bear to pull the lever for an amnesty shill — which is what he is, I hasten to remind you — are our readers going to desert us, too? Define the terms of the litmus test, please.

When this site starts endorsing Marxist for President then, I think you have something worry about.

Kjeil on October 14, 2008 at 6:10 PM

So, I guess Allah will demand that Axlerod work for McCain? What a bunch of crap. When will Hot Air get a second conservative writer to compliment Ed?

Capitalist Infidel on October 14, 2008 at 6:12 PM

How does Buckley know Obama’s intellect? (Which is the basis of his jejune judgment.) Through two books, one of which is tedious, plagiarized partisan drivel (”The Audacity of Hope“), and the former (”Dreams From My Father“), which is racist and machiavellian, and which also may have been ghostwritten?

If it turns out Bill Ayers wrote Obama’s “brilliant” book, what will Chrissy do? Explode, cranially?

Who will care, other than Cindy Sheehan and Rosie?

profitsbeard on October 14, 2008 at 6:12 PM

Let me put things simply for you. Republicans made a mistake in the nomination process hence the need to learn lessons from the scene of rubble before us.

Let me explain this to you:the GOP voters elected the man that looked to have the best prospect in november from a bunch of very weak candidates. Let me remaind you the candidates, except McCain:Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani, Fred Thomspon. To name only the most important ones. Giuliani would have been better than McCain but he was considered by many in the conservative movement an outlaw due to his stance on abortion and he didn’t help himself putting all his chips on Florida. That was a huge mistake. Romney failed to connect with the people and Huckabee was too rural to have any chanse on the national stage.
So, I understand you don’t like McCain, you most likely dissaporve Palin’s choice for the vp and gave up any hope of victory in november.

clemycali on October 14, 2008 at 6:13 PM

When this site starts endorsing Marxist for President then, I think you have something worry about.

Kjeil on October 14, 2008 at 6:10 PM

They pretty much have by their nonstop bashing of McCain/Palin. Even when the primaries were still going on, you could come to HA and it would be all flattering photos of Obama. It was a regular fanboy site.

Blake on October 14, 2008 at 6:14 PM

And how can anyone who calls themselves a conservative stand by and let someone like Barack Obama win the White House without standing against that? It just stuns me.

McCain may not be Newt Gingrich, but Obama sure as hell is not Ronald Reagan either, he is a typical liberal Democrat and he is spouting the same crap liberal Democrats have been pushing for decades…only he left out the bear any burden, pay any price to advance the cause of liberty part.

Terrye on October 14, 2008 at 4:34 PM

I’ll tell you how. When McCain is a prime example of blurring the lines between the Democratic party and the Republican party, and when the Republican party continually bows to the demands of liberals, the schemes of liberals (RAAAACCCISIIIIISSTTTTT, this crafted “economic crisis”, and all of that other pure Crap), and lets them get away with it like watching a bank robbery in broad daylight and not doing anything about it, then yeah, I’m inclined to let you people burn in the fire that you started/neglected to extinguish.

You’re right, Obama is a liberal democrat spitting out liberal democrat garbage. He’s easily identifiable as a wretched sack of crap. McCain is a moderate Republican spitting out liberal democrat garbage. I don’t care if he is only doing it to grab a few votes here and there from America’s stupidest – the undecided voter. If John McCain wants to please anyone to my left, by doing so he’s making it perfectly clear that he doesn’t need my vote this year, and that maybe I should get a few extra hours of sleep on election day before I have to go to my job that may not be there in a year.

leetpriest on October 14, 2008 at 6:19 PM

Buckley is a patrician boor.

And don’t even compare Buckley to Michelle.

Endorsing Obama and refusing to pull the lever for an amnesty lackey are vastly different.

Buckley needs to vote early and go sailing.

molonlabe28 on October 14, 2008 at 6:22 PM

So, I understand you don’t like McCain, you most likely dissaporve Palin’s choice for the vp and gave up any hope of victory in november.

clemycali on October 14, 2008 at 6:13 PM

Had Palin been the POTUS pick, the ticket would have had my full support, and even a $2,301 $2,300 donation on my behalf.

leetpriest on October 14, 2008 at 6:23 PM

Right, cause calling a woman a witch isn’t at all childish.

In response to a witch who has repeatedly implied that I posted something I did not? You got off light.

I tried being reasonable with you, and now I’m done. For fun, I think of you as Baldwin, calling Allah a “fat pig.”

Reasonable? Sure if lying is reasonable and continuing to misrepresent what I have posted like you just did again above.

Though, the more you start ranting, the more I picture you as Sean Penn, and it makes me laugh.

Esthier on October 14, 2008 at 5:17 PM

And you remind me of one of the Rosies – O’Donnell or Barr, take your pick. Must be the reason allahpundit keeps you around. lol!

Blake on October 14, 2008 at 6:23 PM

Republicans made a mistake in the nomination process hence the need to learn lessons from the scene of rubble before us.

Just because Obama and his helpers are throwing rocks in your path doesn’t make it rubble.

Jim Treacher on October 14, 2008 at 6:24 PM

REPOST

The real reason this little pi$$ing match is going on is that the rank-and-file Repubs FAILED to build the hierarchy of the party so that the selected candidate would match the party platform.

The only way that McCain won the primary is that everyone was voting for a person, rather than a platform in a person.

This country was never designed to have elections based on popularity alone (or primarily). Look at RWR – he was a walking talking PLATFORM and merely needed to be elected to have it function as the government.

McCain is better than BHO but he doesn’t have a platform and BHO is trying desperately to hide his platform (Marxism).

platypus on October 14, 2008 at 6:27 PM

If he feels McCain isn’t the McCain he thought he knew and won’t vote for him, fine. But to say that he will vote Obama for such “empty-suit” reasons while admitting he will be crossing his fingers hoping that Obama doesn’t govern as the leftist he appears to be is crazy.

And what the heck does this mean?

But then, conservatives have always had a bit of trouble with the concept of diversity. The GOP likes to say it’s a big-tent. Looks more like a yurt to me.

What is he defining “diversity” as? At the best, barring the potential charge of racism, he is saying that conservatives aren’t “big tent” because they don’t let in liberals. HUH?

It’s funny but, given the picture of him on the top of the Daily Beast page and while reading this:

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.

What came to mind was the Monty Python skit for “Upperclass Twit of the Year“…

Even funnier when he referenced John Cleese in the next line.

Bottom line, after reading both of his posts, seems to be that his elitist a$$ is just all puckered up about Palin.

If he had been homeschooled instead of sent to those poofter factories, he might have grown up with an ability to actually think.

TheCulturalist on October 14, 2008 at 6:32 PM

There seem to still be some folks here who are sincerely trying to understand “why” Son-of-Buckley would think/do/say this.

Folks, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Son-of-B … is just a MORON.

A number of folks here have articulated this point and, it just doesn’t “add up” that a – ahem – CONSERVATIVE/LIBERTARIAN would favor a Socialist promoting socialist policies.

Call it “youth”, call it “follies”, call it “the follies of youth” or what have you…just plain and simple the son learned the style, but not the substance, from dad.

Greater tragedies have occurred on Earth. A pity nonetheless.

GOOD that he left National Review. It shows me that the moron has the remnants of a conscience.

Lockstein13 on October 14, 2008 at 6:32 PM

In response to a witch who has repeatedly implied that I posted something I did not? You got off light.

I’ve never done that, and you know it.

And you remind me of one of the Rosies – O’Donnell or Barr, take your pick. Must be the reason allahpundit keeps you around. lol!

Blake on October 14, 2008 at 6:23 PM

Keeps me around, as in doesn’t ban me as he hasn’t banned you?

Who would have thought you’d begin making even less sense.

Esthier on October 14, 2008 at 6:32 PM

are our readers going to desert us, too?

I dunno, let’s see…

I’m not leaving. HotAir pretends to be something it is not. And I will continue to point out the more than obvious bias it has for Obama.

Blake on October 14, 2008 at 4:46 PM

Nah.

SouthernDem on October 14, 2008 at 6:36 PM

Who would have thought you’d begin making even less sense.

Esthier on October 14, 2008 at 6:32 PM

Best to not engage that one. It’s bipolar.

RushBaby on October 14, 2008 at 6:40 PM

Best to not engage that one. It’s bipolar.

RushBaby on October 14, 2008 at 6:40 PM

Careful. Now you’re next.

Esthier on October 14, 2008 at 6:44 PM

Careful. Now you’re next.

Esthier on October 14, 2008 at 6:44 PM

Good company, right?

platypus on October 14, 2008 at 6:49 PM

President Obama will (I pray, secularly) surely understand that traditional left-politics aren’t going to get us out of this pit we’ve dug for ourselves.

WHAT?!?!? He really hopes and prays that Obama won’t be the far left MARXIST that he is? Sure… and he might as well pray that Nancy Pelosi will never get plastic surgery again.

cannonball on October 14, 2008 at 6:53 PM

Careful. Now you’re next.

Esthier on October 14, 2008 at 6:44 PM

If so it would be “again”. I’ve tangled with it personally.

RushBaby on October 14, 2008 at 6:54 PM

So, I guess Allah will demand that Axlerod work for McCain? What a bunch of crap. When will Hot Air get a second conservative writer to compliment Ed?

Capitalist Infidel on October 14, 2008 at 6:12 PM

To be clear, I’m not questioning AP’s conservativism.

I am calling BS on how he sloppily spun this story as an overt defense of Buckley (stating 3 different ways that he was fired by NR) and a not-so-covert attempt, as one Ace moron said, to “stir the sh!t.” (Hello, page 5 of comments!)

The latter is a tiresome AP tactic. The former speaks to the quality of his reportage and is much more important to his reputation as a thoughtful blogger.

There is a HUGE difference between reporting this event as a thoughtcrime purge at National Review versus Buckley’s little tantrum-induced bluff … getting called.

Allahpundit, you really should update this post to reflect the actual facts and not your projection as some put-upon iconoclast thisclose to sharing Buckley’s fate.

Cuffy Meigs on October 14, 2008 at 7:01 PM

Christopher Buckley welcomes our new overlords.

Quisling.

Mr. Joe on October 14, 2008 at 7:33 PM

Follow-up exit question: If Michelle makes good on her threat not to vote for McCain because she simply can’t bear to pull the lever for an amnesty shill — which is what he is, I hasten to remind you — are our readers going to desert us, too? Define the terms of the litmus test, please.

Allah, you try to hide under Michelle’s skirt? And you throw out a red herring. You don’t endorse and pull the lever for the Socialists. He’s not the only one on the ticket. To say you can’t stomach McCain but in the next breathe you can stomach Barrack? That’s the height of hypocrisy.

To answer your question: YES! If you and Michelle openly endorsed Barrack Obama on this site, I would never don either of your doorsteps again!

Sultry Beauty on October 14, 2008 at 7:33 PM

Why does it not surprise me that Allahpundit is SUCKING THE FEET of Christopher Buckley while wearing Obama’s underwear on his head.

Allahpundit: He’s As Helpful As Leprosy!!

grtflmark on October 14, 2008 at 7:46 PM

I haven’t read all this, but has anyone pointed out to this doofus that it’s likely Obambi didn’t write his books; William Ayers did.

So would he vote for Ayers? The two are peas in a pod.

It’s pretty far from the tree when the son of a conservative endorses a Marxist.

MrLynn on October 14, 2008 at 7:46 PM

Best to not engage that one. It’s bipolar.

RushBaby on October 14, 2008 at 6:40 PM

Not bipolar. Just channeling Andrew Sullivan.

Gobsmackingly vile.

TheUnrepentantGeek on October 14, 2008 at 7:48 PM

Gosh, there’s way too much for one comment here. But what the heck:

… who writes his own books (Ed., not so much) … He is also a lefty. I am not. I am a small-government conservative … On abortion, gay marriage, et al, I’m libertarian … a first-class temperament and a first-class intellect … this pit we’ve dug for ourselves.

Buckley

Nearly all of this is crap. Anyone smart enough to know what Buckley claims to “know” would see that Obama is the scum that I always say he is, because I am that anyone.

… either way he hasn’t repudiated conservatism, in which case what’s the argument for keeping him out of NR? His opinion was worthy enough to qualify for a weekly column and now suddenly it isn’t because on the binary choice of Obama versus McCain he’s gone the wrong way?

Allah

To be fair, here, it should be noted that AP seems to labor under false pretense, in that Buckley wasn’t fired, but quit, and that if I read Lowry’s statement correctly they threw the otherwise talent-free and irrelevant putz a bone and let him write a back-page column while Steyn was in the gulag, and his resignation only saved them the embarrassment of cutting him loose anyway.

Either way, no one in his right mind can claim credibly that an endorsement of butt-boy Obama is not a repudiation of conservatism. Officially – Allah, you’re nuts.

Follow-up exit question: If Michelle makes good on her threat not to vote for McCain because she simply can’t bear to pull the lever for an amnesty shill — which is what he is, I hasten to remind you — are our readers going to desert us, too? Define the terms of the litmus test, please.

No such luck, Sport. You have no doubt resigned yourself to the painful reality that your nastiest critics seem to live to come here and enjoy your great wit and insight while calling you filthy names and questionning your intelligence, sanity and integrity.

So be it.

Jaibones on October 14, 2008 at 8:04 PM

If Michelle makes good on her threat not to vote for McCain because she simply can’t bear to pull the lever for an amnesty shill..

If she does, well, she’s just wrong. What’s she going to do, just not vote? I know damn well she won’t pull the lever for Bambi.

If Michelle, and like-minded voters want to “protest” vote, I don’t want to hear any whining from them when the Supreme Court is loaded with Ginsburgs, we’re paying higher taxes, and the fairness doctrine becomes law.

BacaDog on October 14, 2008 at 8:08 PM

Why does it not surprise me that Allahpundit is SUCKING THE FEET of Christopher Buckley while wearing Obama’s underwear on his head.

Allahpundit: He’s As Helpful As Leprosy!!

grtflmark on October 14, 2008 at 7:46 PM

Ok, that’s ridiculously unfair. AP’s issue is with firing people simply because you disagree with them. It’s a legitimate issue.

Of course, the larger issue here is what NR is conservative publication is supposed to do when an employee advocates for the other side, thus outing himself as a simpleton a soft liberal, or both. AP spun it poorly to stir the pot, I’d wager, but you’ve seriously crossed a line in your response. Welcome to Kos territory.

TheUnrepentantGeek on October 14, 2008 at 8:15 PM

AP’s issue is with firing people

And that’s where he royally blew it.

No one was fired.

Cuffy Meigs on October 14, 2008 at 8:23 PM

And that’s where he royally blew it.

No one was fired.

Cuffy Meigs on October 14, 2008 at 8:23 PM

Absolutely. But he wasn’t “sucking the feet of Christopher Buckley while wearing Obama’s underwear on his head” either.

TheUnrepentantGeek on October 14, 2008 at 8:29 PM

McCain’s numbers have gone down since he picked Palin. He may have convinced a few far-right refuseniks to vote for him, but he drove away a lot more moderates. The coalition is shrinking, and even a few of its most respected voices have either jumped ship or are backed up against the railings. Palin’s got a negative fav./unfav. rating, a large majority thinks she’s unqualified, and the media theme is that she’s corrupt and dumb. It’s not exactly a combination that flatters the McCain campaign.

That’s failing Stats 101. You cannot correlate two trends just on timing. It goes back to the old stats example: “As ice cream consumption increases, so do drownings in swimming pools.”

You can infer that eating ice cream causes you to drown. But the external factor is that ice cream and pools are related by temperature. Both increase independently because of a 3rd factor.

McCain lost ground due to economy jitters. Not because of Tina Fey parodying his running mate.

The only people critical of Palin are Obama supporters. Conservatives need to learn some Palin positivity: every Hillary supporter I know is either voting McCain or voting 3rd party. “I just don’t like Obama.”

Palin is not McCain’s Achilees’ heel.

lansing quaker on October 14, 2008 at 8:38 PM

lansing quaker on October 14, 2008 at 8:38 PM

Thank you for a dose of sanity.

TheCulturalist on October 14, 2008 at 8:54 PM

Who?

There was some guy named Buckley that occasionally had something worth reading or listening to, but I don’t think his name was Christopher.

LegendHasIt on October 14, 2008 at 8:59 PM

If NR’s going to do business this way, why have regular columnists at all? I’ve always thought the point of publishing someone regularly was because you so esteem their viewpoint that you’re willing to hear them out even when you disagree.

Perhaps the NR should change its format to an annual book of positions for its readers to commit to heart and a bi-weekly set of talking points that respond to opposing views and recent events.
Or maybe Brinkley is a closet liberal- although that’s hard to believe.

bayam on October 14, 2008 at 9:04 PM

James Taggart.

JiangxiDad on October 14, 2008 at 5:14 PM

She’d write the perfect book for our times. She died too young.

Entelechy on October 14, 2008 at 9:05 PM

Buckley reached a fork in the road… and stuck it in himself.

profitsbeard on October 14, 2008 at 9:12 PM

Obama and Biden stand for NOTHING The National Review has championed. Why would anyone endorse him who works there? I can understand not endorsing McCain or Obama, but to endorse the more liberal one does not make sense.

Speedwagon82 on October 14, 2008 at 9:17 PM

If Michelle makes good on her threat not to vote for McCain because she simply can’t bear to pull the lever for an amnesty shill — which is what he is, I hasten to remind you — are our readers going to desert us, too?

If she goes on to write a long, blathering column full of emotion and devoid of substance in which she endorses the Obambi and states how she “senses” that he’s a great statesman who will do great things for America, then yes.

And THEN I’ll start a full-scale investigation into where the aliens that abducted Michelle took her.

Until then, your comparison is full of fail.

I don’t give a fig who Junior endorses, that’s his business, but the way he throws a temper tantrum on the way out of the door because Lowry didn’t prostrate himself at his feet and, while kissing his shoes, begged him not to leave… That just proves to me that he’s a primadonna drama queen that needn’t be taken seriously by anything with an actual, measurable IQ.

I will give him this, though: No, the conservative tent isn’t big enough to embrace radical Marxist candidates. Good luck with your new friends on the left, Junior, and let us know how they treat you the first time you deviate as much as an iota from doctrine.

Idiot.

Misha I on October 14, 2008 at 9:19 PM

I’ve always thought the point of publishing someone regularly was because you so esteem their viewpoint that you’re willing to hear them out even when you disagree. That’s certainly my approach with someone like, say, Mark Steyn.

Bad comparison. Almost everything Mark Steyn writes is based on making people who think like him fell good about themselves. He is a coddler.

If Michelle makes good on her threat not to vote for McCain because she simply can’t bear to pull the lever for an amnesty shill — which is what he is, I hasten to remind you — are our readers going to desert us, too?

No they’ll just hand around and moan about it. I hope Michelle makes good on her threat as one of the most serious journalists on the immigration issue.

Define the terms of the litmus test, please.

Be a principled conservative like Michelle Malkin and not a crowd-pleaser like Mark Steyn.

Steyn will be back on the back page in the next issue, so there’s a silver lining.

Yippee! He can go back to congratulating conservatives as he always has and conservatives can go back to drinking the “fine wine” of his columns as Bryan Preston artfully put it.

aengus on October 14, 2008 at 9:28 PM

Don’t let the door hit ya where the Lord split ya.

aikidoka on October 14, 2008 at 9:29 PM

A vote for Obama is a vote for socialism. If people dislike McCain so much, vote for someone else closer to your views, or write in a name, but don’t vote for your (supposed) ideological opposite! This guy is delusional! Buh bye!

WisCon on October 14, 2008 at 9:31 PM

Why does it not surprise me that Allahpundit is SUCKING THE FEET of Christopher Buckley while wearing Obama’s underwear on his head.

grtflmark on October 14, 2008 at 7:46 PM

That is a mental picture I could have lived without. Yuk.

platypus on October 14, 2008 at 9:49 PM

Please change that picture…. When I look at it, I expect to see him slide his jacket off, tie a sweater (Yale or Harvard) around his neck and hand me a card saying:

Christopher “Bucky” Buckley
Raconteur, Bon Vivant

IT MAKES ME WANT TO PUKE!

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 9:52 PM

Everyone would have a first-class temperment if they were handed the presidency with no questions asked, for goodness sake.

The reason Obama is so relaxed is that he knows his backside is covered. He can flip-flop and lie with impunity knowing the press won’t mention it. He can be arrogant and not accused of suffering from hubris. Any negatives the media choses to report will be watered down and whatever is damaging will be ignored. Changing his website to scrub his ACORN involvement? No problem. Police officers and prosecutors willing to arrest anyone who questions you? No problem. Foreign campaign contributions? Heck, the media mastered ignoring that with the Clintons. Buddies with a terrorist for 20 years? No problem.

Who wouldn’t have a first class temperment is that situation?

For temperment to be Buckley’s reason for endorsing Obama only tells me just how shallow the man is. His excuse that conservatives gave us expanded entitlement programs, for example, is just plain silly. Conservatives screamed about it, and he knows it. It was the democrats and a weak President, who is more compassionate than conservative, that passed those bills.

Does he think Obama is going to be more conservative than Bush? Or will Obama’s sunshiny personality just make Buckley feel better when he shows his true colors.

The temperment argument is something I’d expect a teenager to make.

Seems to me Buckley was just waiting for his father to pass on before stepping out of the closet, so to speak.

Sensible Mom on October 14, 2008 at 9:53 PM

Is your tag an Oxymoron, or are you just pretending to be an immature kid that…
leetpriest on October 14, 2008 at 6:00 PM

wise_man, I’m forever amused by the irony of your name. Let me put things…
Zetterson on October 14, 2008 at 6:05 PM

Hey, why don’t you two mock my name. Oh wait. You are. I’m forever disappointed by the lack of intelligent thought since you two can’t come up with an intelligent reply, even combined.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 9:57 PM

Ok, that’s ridiculously unfair. AP’s issue is with firing people simply because you disagree with them. It’s a legitimate issue.

Actually he’s right on. If I pay a waitress to serve tables 1,2,3,and 4 but she delivers the food time and time again to tables 5,6,7,and 8 I suppose to you I’m supposed to keep her. Of course I’d fire her. Even though he wasn’t fired he should have been. He didn’t do the job required of him.

Look, I admire your attempt to defend the indefensible but you have to remember Allah is just like Buckley, never had to work, born with a silver spoon in his mouth. The best we can say is that they’re “Country Club Republicans.” Which just means moderate democrats.

The only reason to read his stuff is because he can spend all day surfing the net finding cool stories. He’s very good at that, in fact he’s the best I’ve seen, his commentary however is sad and pathetic. I wish Ed had more time, if he did that would increase the intellectuality of this site twofold.

Capitalist Infidel on October 14, 2008 at 9:58 PM

If anyone is wondering whether Christopher Buckley has lost his head, I can tell him where to look for it.

Bring a flashlight.

entagor on October 14, 2008 at 9:59 PM

You know I think has a first class temperament- President Bush….

Oops, I guess Buckley doesn’t want to hear that.

terryannonline on October 14, 2008 at 10:00 PM

Am I alone in noticing that Christopher Buckley said that he was libertarian on gay marriage and abortion? Notice that, er, guns are conveniently left out?

What a great guy. He wants his friends’ right to pleasure to be inviolate, but our right to defend our families–that’s negotiable.

I don’t consider myself a libertarian but I have to say: libertarian my ass.

Kenno on October 14, 2008 at 10:00 PM

This song is from the early Seventies. Sure sounds like the script Obambi and MichelleMyBelle are using.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7B238iwAmw

platypus on October 14, 2008 at 10:01 PM

You know I think has a first class temperament- President Bush….

Good call.

Spirit of 1776 on October 14, 2008 at 10:05 PM

Na Na Na Na

Na Na Na Na

Hey Hey…

drjohn on October 14, 2008 at 10:06 PM

McCain lost ground due to economy jitters. Not because of Tina Fey parodying his running mate.

The only people critical of Palin are Obama supporters. Conservatives need to learn some Palin positivity: every Hillary supporter I know is either voting McCain or voting 3rd party. “I just don’t like Obama.”

Palin is not McCain’s Achilees’ heel.

lansing quaker on October 14, 2008 at 8:38 PM

Wish McCain were pulling the Hillary supporters–he’d win easily.

Correlation isn’t causality but the economy tanking is making Mitt look better in hindsight. McCain knew he had enough credibility to cover the ticket if there were a foreign policy crisis. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have that credibility with the economy and Palin doesn’t help.

Looking ahead to 2012, the GOP needs candidates who have a coherent philosophy of government with detailed insight on how to apply those solutions to today’s problems. WFB and Reagan had that. GWB, not so much. Along the way they’ll need to have writers like Krauthammer, Will, and Brooks aboard.

dedalus on October 14, 2008 at 10:07 PM

Spirit of 1776 on October 14, 2008 at 10:05 PM

And I’m not joking about it either. I think he’s been cool under fire for 8 years.

terryannonline on October 14, 2008 at 10:10 PM

Along the way they’ll need to have writers like Krauthammer, Will, and Brooks thrown aboard.

dedalus on October 14, 2008 at 10:07 PM

Fixed that for you….

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:11 PM

And I’m not joking about it either. I think he’s been cool under fire for 8 years.

terryannonline on October 14, 2008 at 10:10 PM

I agree completely. I know of no other person in DC that would have paid the political price he paid to keep that single promise he made to us.

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:12 PM

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:12 PM

Do you seriously need to end your comments with that every time?

terryannonline on October 14, 2008 at 10:16 PM

I like it. At least he’s not flogging his blog.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 10:21 PM

Wish McCain were pulling the Hillary supporters–he’d win easily.

Correlation isn’t causality but the economy tanking is making Mitt look better in hindsight. McCain knew he had enough credibility to cover the ticket if there were a foreign policy crisis. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have that credibility with the economy and Palin doesn’t help.

dedalus on October 14, 2008 at 10:07 PM

As a PUMA who is supporting McCain-Palin, I will tell you right now that if it were McCain-Romney, my vote would have been 3rd party and not McCain-Palin.

Romney would not have come out of this better than Palin. Romeny would have been hammered on his religion. On his flip-flops (social liberal before his Presidential run). On “Massachusetts.” His “economic expertise” would have meant bananas.

I’ve been reading left blogs for years (before they went into the Obama/CDS tank) and they have been hammering Romney forever on these issues. Easy ammo tank.

With Palin? They basically reach into the misogyny pit of “dumb woman” and “church lady” — nothing tangible. And that line enrages a lot of us Hillary PUMAs and women/gays in general.

McCain would not be better off with a Romney VP.

lansing quaker on October 14, 2008 at 10:25 PM

Christopher Buckley’s comments about the socialist Obama are idiotic. The National Review is far better off without Christopher Buckley.

We need to defeat the socialist Obama. There is only one way: elect the McCain-Palin ticket. We need to stop arguing amongst ourselves and do what we have to do to beat Obama.

Sorry, Michelle Malkin, but not voting for the McCain-Palin ticket is just as idiotic as Christopher Buckley’s comments about Obama. John McCain will be an outstanding Commander in Chief. I have two sons in the military, and the notion of acting in a way to help Obama, which is what Michelle Malkin woiuld be doing by not voting for the McCain-Palin ticket, is just enfuriating.

Phil Byler on October 14, 2008 at 10:26 PM

And I’m not joking about it either. I think he’s been cool under fire for 8 years.

terryannonline on October 14, 2008 at 10:10 PM

I know you are. I agree. The fact the press went of one “angry left” comment just shows how even handed he’s been in speech and style.

Spirit of 1776 on October 14, 2008 at 10:30 PM

lansing quaker on October 14, 2008 at 10:25 PM

I thought that Romney would make a good VP pick. Actually, I voted for Romney when the primary came to my state, so I think he would have made a better president. However, I have become really surprised and appreciative of Governor Sarah Palin. I think that Governors make better presidents. Certainly goes to Obama and Biden but to McCain as well. It’s so hard to tell. If McCain and Palin don’t win this time, you know that McCain’s done. As much as Kerry and Gore. I do wish great things for Sarah Palin.

And thanks goes to John McCain for helping to get her into the national spotlight, as she was happy being a 80% approval rating governor not seeking national office. It’s amazing to see the reaction that she’s cause by both liberals (who you’d expect this) and the conservatives who you’d not think they would be so eager to be as deranged as the democrats.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 10:32 PM

Do you seriously need to end your comments with that every time?

terryannonline on October 14, 2008 at 10:16 PM

Actually, I do… it was earlier today that it struck me, just exactly how does someone make that particular slip of the tongue? I understand slips… I’ve made plenty and I’ve seen plenty made. I can understand his “57 states” just being tired on the campaign trail, but how, exactly, does someone make that particular slip.

Short answer… yes, I do.

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:34 PM

This obviously has nothing to do with ideology and everything to do with cold, hard cash.
No one gave a flying fuck about Christopher Buckley prior to this because while he may have posessed his father’s name, he wasn’t fortunate enough to posess even a fraction of his talent. He was a very, very small fish in a very big lake.
Suddenly he’s being hailed for his courageous decision (of course!) and he’s sold his soul away for instant recognition. Please don’t sit here and wonder what he could see in Obama– the only thing to see is that he’s soon going to be Media Darling Buckley, when before he was only William F. Buckley’s kid.

12thMonkey on October 14, 2008 at 10:38 PM

Read one of the best articles ever posted at Hotair. I hold responsible the MSM and Republican Establishment who spoon fed us what we have now. Rush, Beck, Hannity, Drudge, Coulter, et al. They condemned a decent man during the primaries and sabotaged his campaign for President of the United States. Now what are we left with? The greedy cons have taken the Republican party in a direction everyday conservatives don’t want, and now they are whining about having to vote for McCain because of his amnesty plan? Oh, please. You numbskulls! You don’t think Obama’s going to push amnesty?? As bad as John McCain is on the issues, Barack Hussein Obama is worse. There is the abortion issue. You’ll have be more babies murdered under an Obama’s administration. More Americans killed because the land of the law said you shall kill. God’s law says you shall NOT! YOU SHALL NOT KILL! It’s written on your heart! You know this is wrong! McCain and Palin are pro-life and will work to reduce murders. Next, you have the Dems pro-gay agenda. Evidenced by Obama’s campaign handing out pro-gay rights flyers at the Pride Festival in St. Louis. The Democrats will advocate governmental recognition of homosexual adoption rights, domestic partnerships and homosexual civil unions, and you guess it — GAY MARRIAGE. Here Obama congratulates those in California who got married (see bottom). A Democratic govt. will introduce more homosexual propaganda to your children in public schools. Homosexuality is an unnatural and sinful lifestyle that poses a dangerous public health risk. You are HARMING Homosexuals by helping them give in to their sinful desires. It doesn’t make it right just because it feels right. Lastly, the issue of ISRAEL. Following what God says is more important than what Obama and his supporters who never gets it right. The Bible is right! What GOD says is what’s right! “I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee” (Genesis 12:3). “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: They shall prosper that love thee” (Psalm 122:6). THAT IS THE BLUEPRINT FOR THE MIDDLE EAST! And that’s what America should be doing and that’s what every nation should be doing! And if Palin understands that, she understands more than the professors at Columbia and Georgetown and Yale and Harvard and the Ivy leaugue pinhead, pseudo-intellectual, anti-American, anti-semitic, scum,… that,.. that claim to be “experts” on everything and NEVER get anything right! And therefore, I’m supporting Palin and the McCain/Palin ticket.

apacalyps on October 14, 2008 at 10:38 PM

12thMonkey on October 14, 2008 at 10:38 PM

Check out this link at Ace… scroll down a bit to see old “Bucky” and some interesting friends (NBC newser, Markos (dKos), Arianna)….

http://ace.mu.nu/#275627

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:40 PM

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:34 PM

There are plenty of stuff to go after Obama on but let’s not get into questioning his faith. It’s not fair when people question if Trig is Gov. Palin’s baby. Let’s not stoop down to that level.

terryannonline on October 14, 2008 at 10:43 PM

scum

apacalyps on October 14, 2008 at 10:38 PM

Sorry. I shouldn’t have used that word. Should have used something else.

apacalyps on October 14, 2008 at 10:45 PM

The argument for keeping him out of NR would be the same argument for a Christian Magazine keeping out a writer who endorsed Satan.

thirteen28 on October 14, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Oh, you mean a write like Saul Alinsky?:

Alinsky dedicated the first edition of his book, “Rules for Radicals,” to Satan: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”

electric-rascal on October 14, 2008 at 10:45 PM

apacalyps on October 14, 2008 at 10:38 PM

Hey, look a huck supporter. They are so cute. Don’t you think?

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 10:45 PM

Everyone would have a first-class temperment if they were handed the presidency with no questions asked, for goodness sake.

Exactly. And we got a look at the real Obama in the week immediately following Palin’s arrival. If he can’t hold it together when a cute lady with glasses pokes at his ego, how is he going to stand up to Ahmadinejad?

But I guess Buckley was on vacation that week.

Jim Treacher on October 14, 2008 at 10:46 PM

The argument for keeping him out of NR would be the same argument for a Christian Magazine keeping out a writer who endorsed Satan.

thirteen28 on October 14, 2008 at 4:12 PM

Oh, you mean a writer like Saul Alinsky, wrote a letter of recommendation for Obama when he applied to Harvard Law School?:

Alinsky dedicated the first edition of his book, “Rules for Radicals,” to Satan: “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”

electric-rascal on October 14, 2008 at 10:46 PM

(sorry for the double post)

electric-rascal on October 14, 2008 at 10:47 PM

But I guess Buckley was on vacation that week.

Jim Treacher on October 14, 2008 at 10:46 PM

He was signing books with Markos and Arianna…

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:48 PM

Actually he’s right on. If I pay a waitress to serve tables 1,2,3,and 4 but she delivers the food time and time again to tables 5,6,7,and 8 I suppose to you I’m supposed to keep her. Of course I’d fire her. Even though he wasn’t fired he should have been. He didn’t do the job required of him.

Look, I admire your attempt to defend the indefensible but you have to remember Allah is just like Buckley, never had to work, born with a silver spoon in his mouth. The best we can say is that they’re “Country Club Republicans.” Which just means moderate democrats.

The only reason to read his stuff is because he can spend all day surfing the net finding cool stories. He’s very good at that, in fact he’s the best I’ve seen, his commentary however is sad and pathetic. I wish Ed had more time, if he did that would increase the intellectuality of this site twofold.

Capitalist Infidel on October 14, 2008 at 9:58 PM

Actually, you suppose incorrectly. Cuffy already nailed why AP is wrong on this issue, but I put forth my own argument – and it rather resembled the one you make here.

I simply think some people are taking this as an opportunity to make unfair accusations about AP. I’d like to know, for example, how you know his personal story. Are you acquainted? Can you verify that he’s really “never had to work?”

In what way has AP shown himself to be anything other than a conservative? On what issues does he differ from the conservative mainstream? Please use specifics.

I’d like answers to these questions. If you can’t be bothered to read what I write it seems the least you can do. Or you could continue to claim that he’s “sucking Buckley’s feet” or somesuch nonsense … without a scrap of proof.

TheUnrepentantGeek on October 14, 2008 at 10:49 PM

I’m with NR on this one. Who wants to hear the opinion of someone dumber than yourself? That is usually why I read certain peoples writings over others, because they have the reasoned answers and perspectives you don’t get from more liberal types. If I have the choice of listening to someone who always has intelligent perspectives on things or listening to someone who 15 or so percent of the time takes positions that are ludicrous, then who would I want to listen too? Reminds me of Glenn Beck. He is good most of the time but sometimes he says things that are just downright liberal. I actually heard him say that he supported the Israelis giving their land over to the Arab terrorists. That also kind of reminds me of the time that Ed Morrisey said that it was a mistake that the Israelis didn’t provided protection to Jimmy Carter when he went to visit the terrorists.

NeverLiberal on October 14, 2008 at 10:50 PM

John O’Sullivan, a former editor of National Review, once enunciated O’Sullivan’s law, which states that any institution not explicitly conservative will become liberal with the passage of time.

Now it seems that this has been proven true with Buckley’s own family.

PackerBronco on October 14, 2008 at 10:51 PM

Along the way they’ll need to have writers like Krauthammer, Will, and Brooks thrown aboard.

dedalus on October 14, 2008 at 10:07 PM

Fixed that for you….

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:11 PM

 
 
Along the way they’ll need to have writers like Krauthammer, Will, Brooks, and Noonan thrown overboard.

 
 
Fixed that for you….
 
 

ignatzk on October 14, 2008 at 10:52 PM

But he was such a snappy dresser-

anniekc on October 14, 2008 at 10:54 PM

Hey, look a huck supporter. They are so cute. Don’t you think?

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 10:45 PM

“Should a wise man utter vain knowledge, and fill his belly with the east wind? Should he reason with unprofitable talk? or with speeches wherewith he can do no good?” Job 15:2-3

apacalyps on October 14, 2008 at 10:55 PM

In what way has AP shown himself to be anything other than a conservative? On what issues does he differ from the conservative mainstream? Please use specifics.

TheUnrepentantGeek

I’ve heard AP say some not so conservative things before. I don’t remember them all but he is an atheist and he seems to take some liberal positions on religion in government. He made a post about something James Dobson said a few months back and everyone on the site was railing on AP for it. His statements on James Dobson were unwarranted.

NeverLiberal on October 14, 2008 at 10:59 PM

What’s “Job 15:2-3″ is this something I should know? My name is wiseman. I’m jewish.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 11:00 PM

NeverLiberal on October 14, 2008 at 10:59 PM

In other words, he’s a maverick.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 11:01 PM

Check out this link at Ace… scroll down a bit to see old “Bucky” and some interesting friends (NBC newser, Markos (dKos), Arianna)….

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 10:40 PM

Well, I guess it’s started already. Does anyone here really think someone with even a shred of conservative principles would be kicking it with this crowd? Shit, that’s like John the Baptist at a dinner party held by the Four Horsemen.
Speaking of, doesn’t Arianna look a little like Death these days…?

12thMonkey on October 14, 2008 at 11:04 PM

Do you think his Dad would have endorsed Obama?

Nope.

Nuff said.

HondaV65 on October 14, 2008 at 11:08 PM

Speaking of, doesn’t Arianna look a little like Death these days…?

12thMonkey on October 14, 2008 at 11:04 PM

Ran out of batteries two weeks ago….

CC – BHO: “my Muslim faith”

CapedConservative on October 14, 2008 at 11:09 PM

He’s a typical beltway elitist. Conservative on taxes, that’s about it. His comments show his true colors and I find it ironic that these clowns claim to be true Reagan conservatives yet can’t stand the thought of Palin’s presence on the national stage. HELLO! Reagan went to Eureka college!

kongzilla on October 14, 2008 at 11:10 PM

What’s “Job 15:2-3″ is this something I should know? I’m jewish.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 11:00 PM

You’re Jewish and instruction from the Book of Job is foreign to you? Job chapter 15 verses 2-3 is great advice.

My name is wiseman.

I know. That’s why I chose Job 15:2-3 with “wise man” in it.

“Should a wise man utter vain knowledge, and fill his belly with the east wind? Should he reason with unprofitable talk? or with speeches wherewith he can do no good?” Job 15:2-3

This was my response to your little joke about me being a Huck supporter — which I am. Huck by the way is the Jewish people’s greatest supporter out of all the candidates. Too bad you didn’t reciprocate.

apacalyps on October 14, 2008 at 11:13 PM

Sorry. I voted for Romney. Just looking out for my pocketbook.

wise_man on October 14, 2008 at 11:22 PM

Arianna is hideous. Always has been.

Kenno on October 14, 2008 at 11:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5


You must be logged in to post a comment.