-
What Obama Should Have Done During Subsequent Debates
October 29, 2012 | 6 comments
-
Just Another Casual Conversation About Voter Fraud
October 26, 2012 | 0 comments
-
CNN: Obama’s plan not “significantly new,” just same old stuff repackaged
October 23, 2012 | 6 comments
-
Acts of Terror, etc.
October 16, 2012 | 15 comments
-
Devastating RNC ad captures Biden laughing at the issues
October 11, 2012 | 9 comments
The Spectacle Blog
New York magazine’s John Heilemann’s wishful thinking is confirmed:
Conservatism, [Christopher Buckley] thinks, is facing nothing less than an existential crisis. The
events of recent days may have given him less of a stake in the outcome than before, but still he
offers a friendly word of advice for those who care to listen. “The smart ones in the movement should get together right after the election at the Greenbrier or the Homestead, you know, where they typically have these kinds of get-togethers, and have a long dark night of the soul,” he says. “And I’ll tell you what the conference should be called: Conservatism—What the F—-?”
I thought conservatives were already having a long dark night of the soul — for the last eight years. The P3 (the Prospect of a Palin Presidency) isn’t the spark. It’s an unfortunate casualty. As for the rest of this piece, I’m not entirely certain that the roster of interviewees is sufficient to call well-reported. Sheryl Stolberg’s Times article on Christopher Buckley commits a similar omission, specifically an interview with Rich Lowry, who deserves to (and ought to) weigh in on the matter. (It’s possible Lowry is refraining from commenting, erring on the side of politeness.) It remains entirely weird though, that Buckley is allowing this trope, that his resignation was actually a dismissal. The man is still on the board of National Review, after all. If he’s so upset about it, why not resign that too?
It’s a shame. He puts NR in a difficult position where they can’t respond in kind simply out of politeness and duty to the memory of his father. They can only clarify the facts as they see it and drop it. I don’t think turning to the Times and then to New York counts as “no hard feelings, only warmest regards and understanding.”
Anyway, is this really the basis for the new conservative discussion? I think I’ll sleep through that long dark night of the soul (with one eye open) thank you very much.
View all comments (6) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by J.P. Freire
http://spectator.org/blog/2008/10/22/along-comes-a-crack-up
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jasper Getman| 10.22.08 @ 2:35PM
Buckley's behavior reminds me of nothing so much as the oft-told tale of the son who 'inherits' the family business and, not having the drive and ethics of the father, soon runs it into the ground, thinking that his name is a substitute for principles.
J David| 10.22.08 @ 2:53PM
When Ann Coulter said a few months ago, in one of her weekly columns, said that the National Review was "becoming increasingly irrelevant" she hit the nail right on the head.
Francis Beckwith | 10.22.08 @ 3:08PM
Final Jeopardy answer:
Jakob Dylan, Christopher Buckley, Prince Charles, Sean Lennon, Frank Sinatra, Jr.
Why talent is not entirely genetic?
james23| 10.22.08 @ 3:24PM
Ahoy Christo! Maybe you should organize one of those cruises like NR and the other pundits do. Theme could be "Socialism, the New Conservatism." Invite your friends Parker, Noonan and Frum, see if you can get anyone else to buy tickets.
J. Peter Freire | 10.22.08 @ 4:23PM
J David,
As an editor of a magazine that has been accused of irrelevancy, moral bankruptcy, and other slurs at one point or another, I'm loathe to accept the "irrelevance" of National Review on face. Frankly, it's difficult to be exciting when you're sharing a big tent with people in power, and they've done a pretty good job of it.
There have been missteps ("Unpatriotic Conservatives" comes to mind, which I don't think should ever have been published). To say that the magazine is marginal, though, is to ignore its rich history and its current status as a strong clearinghouse for conservative opinion.
Is it different from the days of Frank Meyer and James Burnham? Yes. But the whole world is different. NR's "The Week" section remains the fastest and most thoughtful read on the news I can find anywhere.
Anyway, J David, I'm slightly confused. Is your point that Christopher Buckley has outgrown NR? Or that it doesn't matter either way?
In the first instance, Christopher has never really pretended to be a conservative leader. Don't mistake liberal assumptions otherwise -- they're interested in this story primarily because *they* think he is one. I don't even think his self-description as an apostate is accurate given that we've never quite known what he's believed anyway. If we go by his public actions, rather than his father's belief system, we'd see a bit of a contrast.
As for the latter thought, that NR is irrelevant regardless, I guess you could tell that to reporters David Freddoso and Stanley Kurtz, who've done more to debunk myths about Obama than many other conservative outlets.
Just because some think it's fun to slam compatriots doesn't mean I want to play. Not when there are bigger fish to fry.