Buckley leaves National Review after Obama endorsement

Buckley leaves National Review after Obama endorsement

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com

"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," Buckley wrote.

"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," he also wrote.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Christopher Buckley was mentioned (and discussed) in some of the recent threads here on ATS, and now we get to see what kind of reaction followed his endorsement of Obama, from the conservative readership. Of course, this was predictable and the most valuable part of this news is his comment on the conservative moevement.

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Wow this is big. He brings up great points which is why I no longer consider myself a Republican anymore either. They stand for nothing. They claim one thing but when given the chance did the complete opposite. I voted for Bush in 2000 and Im not ashamed to admit it. He ran on no nation building, no intervention, smaller government, balanced budgets, and liberty. Well 8 years later we all know how this panned out. The thing is though the democrats are no better. The are exactly what the republicans have been in the past 8 years the only difference is they will raise your taxes to pay for all the big spending up front so there is no huge debt. That is the only difference. That takes balls for what Buckley did and I give him props. More people need to do the same to hopefully wake the Republicans up because they really need a kick in the face to get them back on track.

Chris Buckley is the son of the father (so brother?) of the modern conservative movement's daddy. Bill Buckley was, to my mind, a bit of an ass but he was always thinking and striving for a smaller federal government. I totally disagree with William F. but agree that he was a first class intellect and one of the founders of the modern conservative movement. The fact that his son, who followed very closely yin his fathers footsteps, has left the National Review (which WF Buckley founded!) speaks volumes to the perversion of the modern incarnation of the movement.

What passes as conservatism today is not the conservatism of Bill Buckley.

"Limited government" is no more than a slogan for the modern Republican Party, they have steadily increased the size and scope of the federal government. The anti-interventionist and civil liberties elements of traditional conservative philosophy have been largely discarded. The free market aspects of it have largely been replaced by cynical cronyism.

Since Nixon, the Republicans have been selling mostly "right authoritarianism" (and the Democrats just as often "left authoritarianism" in lieu of true "liberalism") not "conservatism."

The closest thing to genuine philosophical conservatism these days is perhaps the Libertarian Party, it's certainly not the Republicans, sad to say.

The Republican Party has largely become a creature of lobbies for cultural & religious reactionaries, defense and oil industry interests, and the simply avaricious.

[edit on 10/14/08 by xmotex]

^^^ Excellent post.

Read Conservatives Without Conscience, by John Dean. He lays out the reasons quite convincingly.


And I agree, thought I consider myself a conservative, I would certainly not publicly identify myself as such, as I share little with most who do.

The libertarian party has never looked more appealing than today for both disenchanted dems and repubs.