Opinion of William F. Buckley, Jr.?

[opebo]

Very enjoyable and amusing horrible person.

[Antonio the Sixth]

So FF is winning and this is supposed to be a "left-wing" forum?

[Goldwater]

So FF is winning and this is supposed to be a "left-wing" forum?

Yea, this is forum obviously doesn't have any left-wing leanings! I mean, it's not like a Socialist beat Eisenhower in a fantasy election or anything....

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I sort of mixed points. It was doubly addressed to you and ChairmanSanchez. My original point was that I thought neocon and paleocon were mainly relegated to discussions of foreign policy, given you used it to separate social positions. (at which point I'd turn to Sanchez and make my point on Iraq)

EDIT: Also, it is noteworthy that a number of conservatives, when the term "neocon" became in vogue, were like "What the Hell is "neo" about me? I've always been a conservative!" I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that every supporter of the Iraq War or whathaveyou would've been a liberal, marxist, Democrat, or whatever Pat Buchanan's theory is, back in the day. (Allow for hyperbole in my expression)

Buckley opposed the Iraq War because he likely foresaw the rising of the Buchananite/Paulite position in a few years. The man was smart, and as Oldies mentioned on his civil rights position, he always knew how to switch issues while still seeming flat-out "conservative." But in the sense that he represented the general switch from the old right, Robert Taft era Republicans to the Nixon-Ford-Reagan era conservatism, he certainly put the "neo" in neocon. Buckley embodied that type of plain "conservatism" which the likes of Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney embrace today. And that modern "plain" conservatism is modern day neo-conservatism, minus the overly pro war rhetoric that was more or less an addition from Cheney than the ideology itself.

And also minus the opposition to the civil rights movement in the 60s.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I presume that others here have read Girl with Curious Hair?