Goodbye, Mr. Buckley, and Thank you.

I was 20 years old and in Vietnam when I first became acquainted with William F. Buckley. It was during a late night beer drinking session in the barracks, with a half dozen GI’s sitting around arguing politics when a fellow Airman asked me if I was familiar with National Review. I was not, and was only vaguely familiar with William F. Buckley. I had probably read his column, On The Right, which I seem to recall, was carried in our local Republican newspaper, but I did not know a lot about him. The next day, the fellow GI gave me my first copy of National Review. I did not know it at the time, but that was a momentous moment and impacted my life.

I grew up in a family that daily watched the evening TV news and read the daily newspaper. My parents always voted and took the responsibilities of citizenship seriously. The news of the day was discussed around the dinner table. My parents were intelligent and informed but neither were college graduates or what one would consider intellectuals. My parents were both Republicans and as I grew up, I essentially adopted their political outlook.

Most of my political education came from my father. His political opinions, other than from the daily newspaper, were formed by what we would now call the “Religious Right”. The Sword of the Lord, a publication of Bob Jones University that I am sure I would now see as narrow minded and perhaps even racist, was an early source of political information. When I was in about the 7th and 8th grade my Dad drove me to school each morning and we would listen on the radio to the Reverend Carl McIntire, a dissident Presbyterian ministry whose message was anti-National Council of Churches and anti-communist. As a little older teen, I discovered another member of the religious right, the Reverend Billy James Hargus and the Christian Crusade, whose “ministry” was also anti-communism and general promotion of the conservative agenda. My early political education came primarily from these religious-tinted conservative sources. Somewhere along the way, I also became acquainted with the John Birch Society.

About the time I was thirteen or fourteen, I discovered another political perspective when I read Atlas Shrugged, the famous novel by Ayn Rand. Rand was thought provoking and excited me and challenged some of the religious right opinion to which I was being exposed. So, I had influence from two extremes of the conservative spectrum, by the time I was fourteen or fifteen.

In the Presidential election of 1964, I became enthused by the Goldwater campaign and was disappointed when my conservative father decided Goldwater was too extreme and he had to vote for LBJ. Throughout that political campaign, I repeatedly tried to get my father to see what a mistake he was making and tried to get him to support Goldwater, to no avail. Those arguments with my father caused me to deepen my political knowledge as I sought support for my position.

So, when I was first handed that copy of National Review, I already had a large degree of political knowledge but with large gaps, and much of it coming from the fringe. In the pages of National Review I discovered the history of ideals and the foundations of western thought and was introduced to economic theory and political philosophy. I discovered critical thought and how to think in a logical manner. I came to discover how neither the extreme religious right nor the libertarians had a monopoly on the truth. I discovered that political ideas cannot always be expressed on a bumper sticker or what we now call “sound bytes.”

After reading my first issue of NR, I subscribed and for most of the next twenty-five years. I only discontinued reading, when my life got so busy, that I realized most of the issues were going unread. During those early years I read every issue cover to cover. National Review and Buckley kept me running to the dictionary looking up new words and Latin phrases. NR whetted my appetite to learn more and I read John Locke and Adam Smith and Edmund Burke and gained an acquaintance with the larger body of western thought. Just by the casual reverences to literary works and historical figures, I discovered there was so much I did not know, and I wanted to know more. Also, from the pages of National Review I read some of the greatest thinkers of the day such as Russell Kirk, Whitaker Chambers, Frank Meyer, and James Burnham.

In addition to NR, for many years I rarely missed an episode of Firing Line. There is very little television that can compare today. In the format of the current day, people do not have conversations about politics or ideas but they shout slogans at each other. Buckley believed passionately in his ideas, but on Firing Line, he and a guest, even one with whom he strongly disagreed, could quietly explain and discuss their positions without denigrating into name-calling. Unfortunately I have failed to be as dispassionate and polite in some of my political discourse, but I admired it in Buckley. On firing line, I leaned a lot from Buckley, but also from his many guest with opposing views.

I also loved Buckley’s stammering pattern of speech, and lifted eyebrow, and his wit and charm. I, or course, did not agree with Buckley on every issue. Buckley was a stanch Catholic and had a deep religious faith. Most of my adult life, I have had a difficult time reconciling faith and reason. On most issues however, I found that Buckley guided the development of my position or we had views that coincided.

Buckley gave me a thirst for knowledge. Coming from a humble working class background, a poor rural school district, and having parents neither of whom had an education beyond a high school GED, and having no roll models of professional and educated people, there was no expectation that I would go to college. Going to college was something other people did; it was never considered or encouraged. After having completing my military service and then working a few years, I started thinking that perhaps, I should take advantage of the GI bill and go to school. So, at the age of 25 or 26 I entered college. To my surprise, I leaned that my fear of college was unfounded, and I was a good student.

If I had had a teacher or parents or someone who instilled in me an expectation to go on to school, I am sure I would have done so much earlier. I think the thing that made me finally decide to take the plunge was reading National Review. At some point I realized that with every issue I was reading the writing of smart, knowledgeable, educated people, and I wanted to be educated. I owe Buckley not only for my political education but also for my desire to become educated.

With the passing of Buckley, I feel that an era has come to an end. Buckley resigned as editor of National Review some years ago, and was only seldom heard from in recent years. But, his death leaves me grieving for our country and for the conservative movement. The Cold war may very well have been the glue that held the conservative movement together and times do change. With the passing of Buckley, it seems like the last link between what was the conservative movement and the politics of today has been severed.

I loved Ronald Reagan, and highly respected and admired Milton Friedman, but their passing did not seem like the end of an era. Their passing did not seem so personal. The loss of Buckley seems much more profound than those. I wish there was another way to mark his passing. I would have liked to have attended a memorial service to mark the occasion of the passing of this great man.

Goodbye, Mr. Buckley, and thank you.

Top Stories

Williams F. Buckley Remembered

The Wall Street Journal pays tribute to William F. Buckley Jr in this video.

Top Stories

For Some it Begins With Williams F. Buckley, Jr.

There are a pair of satirical memoirs of the libertarian movement by Jerome Tuccille, It Usually Begins with Ayn Rand and It Still Begins with Ayn Rand. For me, at least, it began with William F. Buckley, Jr. Buckley was, of course, considered conservative, not libertarian, but it was a distinction without a difference as could be seen, for example, in his 1995 statement to the New York Bar Association on the «War on Drugs»:

I have not spoken of the cost to our society of the astonishing legal weapons available ow to policemen and prosecutors; of the penalty of forfeiture of one's home and property for violation of laws which, though designed to advance the war against drugs, could legally be used -- I am told by learned counsel -- as penalties for the neglect of one's pets. I leave it at this, that it is outrageous to live in a society whose laws tolerate sending young people to life in prison because they grew, or distributed, a dozen ounces of marijuana. I would hope that the good offices of your vital profession would mobilize at least to protest such excesses of wartime zeal, the legal equivalent of a My Lai massacre. And perhaps proceed to recommend the legalization of the sale of most drugs, except to minors.

Perhaps the greatest way Buckley's loss will be felt is in not having someone to make such an eloquent, conservative case against the excesses of wartime zeal in the current War on an Abstraction.

My Comment: The above is from fellow blogger "Tom Rants" and expresses my sentiment also. While Buckley is often portrayed, by those who are only casually acquainted with his body of work, as a stanch anti-communist, committed Catholic, and a traditionalist, Buckley's political philosophy also was generously sprinkled with libertarianism. He occasionally annoyed the more traditionalist wing of the movement by his more libertarian positions. In the 60's when the generation gap was at its peak and many conservatives were spending time fighting long hair and marijuana use rather than the ideas of the left, the mischievous Buckley admitted that he had smoked marijuana. He said he sailed out beyond the three mile territorial waters of the US to do so however, in order avoid violation of American law. Buckley could make light of marijuana use and advocate decriminalization of marijuana and still hold the various strains of the movement together. Buckley was able to hold the economic free-marketeers, religious and cultural traditionalist, and libertarians in a coalitions and make the movement a coherent whole. He defined was was modern conservatism.

Top Stories

William F. Buckley Jr. Is Dead at 82

By DOUGLAS MARTIN
February 27, 2008, The New York Times (link)

William F. Buckley Jr., who marshaled polysyllabic exuberance, famously arched eyebrows and a refined, perspicacious mind to elevate conservatism to the center of American political discourse, died Wednesday at his home in Stamford, Conn.

Mr Buckley, 82, suffered from diabetes and emphysema, his son Christopher said, although the exact cause of death was not immediately known. He was found at his desk in the study of his home, his son said. “He might have been working on a column,” Mr. Buckley said.
Mr. Buckley’s winningly capricious personality, replete with ten-dollar words and a darting tongue writers loved to compare with an anteater’s, hosted one of television’s longest-running programs, “Firing Line,” and founded and shepherded the influential conservative magazine, “National Review.”

He also found time to write at least 55 books, ranging from sailing odysseys to spy novels to celebrations of his own dashing daily life, and to edit five more. His political novel “The Rake” was published last August, and a book looking back at the National Review’s history in November; a personal memoir of Barry Goldwater is due to be publication in April, and Mr. Buckley was working on a similar book about Ronald Reagan for release in the fall.
The more than 4.5 million words of his 5,600 biweekly newspaper columns, “On the Right,” would fill 45 more medium-sized books.

Mr. Buckley’s greatest achievement was making conservatism — not just electoral Republicanism, but conservatism as a system of ideas — respectable in liberal post-World War II America. He mobilized the young enthusiasts who helped nominate Barry Goldwater in 1964, and saw his dreams fulfilled when Reagan and the Bushes captured the Oval Office.

Top Stories

William F. Buckley, RIP

I just now heard on the radio that William F. Buckley passed away. Buckley was one of my heroes. In the late 50's and early 60's Buckley essentially founded the modern conservative movement and made conservatism respectable. He pulled together the coalition of libertarians, anti-communist, and conservatives of various strips into a coherent movement. He provided a home for the intellectual conservative. Some of the greatest political minds of the 20th century worked for National Review, the magazine founded by Buckley. His influence is hard to underestimate. In the books he wrote, on his long-running television program Firing Line, in the pages of National Review, and in his syndicated columns he analyzed the current events and the news developments of the day, and spread the ideas that define modern conservatism. Much of the credit for the West developing the ideas necessary and the will power essential to countering and defeating Communism must go to Buckley. The passing of William F. Buckley is the end of an era. I mourn his passing. He will be missed.

Top Stories

Bush might be right on Iran,

but then who will believe him?

The Tennessean, Friday, 11/02/07

The Bush administration has two major obstacles to overcome in dealing with an increasingly dangerous-looking Iran. The first is Iran's nuclear ambitions. The second is the Bush administration's own lack of credibility, from the way it handled Iraq.
To continue reading: Bush Might …

My Commentary
This editorial nailed it. We have a dilemma. It seems clear that Iran is a threat to world peace. It is clear that Iran is pursuing a nuclear program that they claim it is for peaceful purposes, but which few believe. The Iranian President has called for wiping Israel off the face of the map. We cannot allow Iran to become a nuclear power.

However, after the Bush history of lies and manipulations that led to war in Iraq and the mess created by that adventure, who can trust Bush’s leadership, integrity, or wisdom?

On the other hand, the moral of the story of The Boy who Cried Wolf is not that there is never a wolf. What if Bush is exactly right about Iran? If Iran is on the verge of getting nuclear weapons, we don’t want to wait until they have nuclear weapons before we decide to take action.

A few months ago, William F. Buckley, announced his split with Bush and argued against a preemptive air strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. "If we find there is a warhead there that is poised, the range of it is tested, then we have no alternative,” said Buckley. “ But pending that, we have to ask ourselves, 'What would the Iranian population do?'"

I would not be surprised if we wake up some morning soon to find that we have bombed Iran. I hope not. At some point, that may be necessary. But I will not believe it is necessary if done by this administration. I will be distrustful of any pre-emptive strike by this administration, unless they can prove it meets the Buckley test.

The intelligence community says Iran is about five years away from having a nuclear weapon. Again however, how can we trust the intelligence community, since they got is so wrong on Iraq? If we can assume the intelligence is right, then there is time to wait. I hope the intelligence estimate is right and Bush will leave Iran for the next administration to deal with.

Top Stories

Land Deal Protects Cave with Ancient Drawings

Tennessee Parks and Greenways Foundation buys 385-acre site south of Crossville

By ANNE PAINE Staff Writer The Tennessean (link)

CROSSVILLE, Tenn. — The green, 385-acre Devilstep Hollow has guarded a secret since prehistoric times. A cave lies underground with bird-man creatures and other mysterious images carved into the limestone or painted on the walls.

This is one of only about 60 cave art sites documented in the Southeast, and 48 in Tennessee, according to Jan Simek, distinguished professor of science and interim chancellor of the University of Tennessee.

The Devilstep cave art should survive modern times because the Tennessee Parks and Greenways Foundation has acquired the land, and the state is buying it at cost, about $2.1 million, including surveying and fees. This will protect the natural area and spring that helps form the Sequatchie River, but the cave is its most unusual feature.

My Comment: Last summer I spent a weekend at Devilstep hollow. The site being protected is a beautiful lush green valley and the mouth of a cold mountain stream flowing out of a cave. The site is surrounded by beautiful mountains. Thanks to the work of the Tennessee Parks and Greenways Foundation this archaeological treasure and this beautiful spot of God's good earth is being protected for future generations. Kathleen Williams, the Executive Director of the foundation is my sister. I am proud of the work she is doing to protect the waterfalls, wilderness, and scenic vistas of Tennessee.

Top Stories

Illegal Immigrants Can Get Bank Accounts, Credit Cards, Car Loans, and Mortgages!

Many Americans are outraged to discover than illegal immigrants can get credit cards, bank accounts, car loans and mortgages. Perhaps opponents of illegal immigration deplore bank accounts and mortgages for undocumented people because they see it as aiding and abetting criminals. It is not now, nor has it ever been, a crime to sell goods or services to foreigners. Is not food more important to survival than bank accounts? If providing financial services to illegal immigrants is aiding and abetting illegal immigration this is not selling groceries to illegal immigrants also aiding and abetting criminals? Why are financial services different?

Nashville conservative talk-radio host Phil Valentine’s radio program has commercial sponsors. I wonder if any of those sponsors ever sell products to illegal immigrants? If they do, then we can blame Phil Valentine for facilitating illegal immigration.

When immigrants get bank accounts or home loans, it is not the American taxpayers who are providing these services or financing these loans, but commercial for-profit companies. Just because banks have names such as “First American”, or “US Bank”, or “First National” does not mean they are part of the government. Banks are non-government entities and it is not their job to enforce immigration laws. It is their job to make a profit. Many of the same conservatives who object to the Federal Government loading down American businesses with burdensome regulations, advocate that businesses be required to enforce immigration laws and be able to prove they are not doing business with undocumented persons.

Financial institutions provide services to illegal immigrants because it is good business. To qualify for most of these financial services, the undocumented applicant cannot have spotty job histories, poor credit or no credit, nor can they have been working “off the books.” First of all, they must have their ‘illegal immigrant id card’ known as a matrícula consular, which is an Id card issued by the local Mexican Consulate. They must then have a W-7, which is also know as an individual tax identification number (ITIN). The ITIN allows the illegal immigrant to pay federal income taxes. If we are not going to allow them to take out loans because that somehow facilitates their illegal immigration, should we not also refuse to accept their tax payments for the same reason? The IRS had issued approximately 9 million of these ITIN’s.

With the proper Id and credit, illegal immigrants can buy health insurance, set up checking accounts, check out library books and make monthly payments on big screen TVs, sign up for phone and cable TV service, and get car loans and mortgages. When they start doing these things, they will be spending more money in America and sending less money home. And, they will be putting down roots.

Perhaps it is putting down of roots that really bothers people. As long as the immigrants were renting and living “off the book” in the underground economy, and had to turn to predatory lenders for financial services they did not seem like our neighbors and part of our community; they were transient and we thought they would move on.

When immigrants purchase homes, establish churches, finance cars, and when their American born children start playing football at the local high school it will be harder to uproot the foreigners among us. When your neighbor who picked up your newspaper when your are out of town and who helped you start your car on that cold morning when it would not start, is suddenly threatened with deportation, you may soften the “no amnesty” rhetoric. It is hard to hate your neighbor when your know him and he becomes more like you. Maybe that is the reason immigration opponents are outraged to discover that illegal immigrants can open bank accounts.

Top Stories

Foreigners are Buying Property in America!

Internet chatters and local and national pundits are discovering that foreigners are purchasing homes in America and they are expressing surprise and outrage. They are not happy.

It has never been a requirement that one had to be an American citizen to own property in America; one does not even have to be a resident of America. If residency is not even a requirement for owning property, then why are people so concerned about the residency status of those who are purchasing homes?

Ever since we have been a nation, foreigners have owned property in this country. Foreigners own stock in corporations that own timberland, manufacturing plants, shopping centers and office buildings. Some of those corporations have majority foreign investors, or the American corporation may be owned by a foreign corporation.

Chrysler has changed hands again, but for a while it was owned by a German firm and Chrysler was renamed DaimlerChrysler. A few years ago a Japanese company, the Mitsubishi Group, purchased the entire 22 acres Rockefeller Center complex in midtown Manhattan, the home of Radio City Music Hall, Rockefeller Plaza, and NBC.

Nissan has an auto plant in Smyrna Tennessee, a town in the county next door to Nashville. Tennessee sought the plant and Nissan's investment has been and economic boon to the region.

Wealthy foreigners own condos in New York City, Miami Beach, Vail Colorado and elsewhere throughout America. The less wealthy foreigners may own vacation time-shares in Gatlinburg or Gulf Shores.

Not only do foreigners own property in American but Americans also own property in other countries throughout the world. Many wealthy Americans have condos on the French Riviera or vacation homes in the Caribbean. Over one million Americans own property in Mexico. As the baby boomers reach retirement age, many are discovering their retirement income goes a lot further in Mexico and they can enjoy a better lifestyle south of the border. They are moving there in droves.

American companies own or have ownership interest in vineyards, banana plantations, manufacturing plants, utility companies, and land holdings throughout the world. Prior to it being nationalized, Americans owned a large chuck of the real estate in Cuba. American Telephone and Telegraph at one time had large holding in many countries of the world. Many developing countries seek and welcome this foreign investment. If you have an IRA invested in a Mutual Fund, you may have an ownership interest in a foreign corporations with real estate holdings.

Do the same people who object to foreign ownership of American properties object to American ownership in foreign countries?

I am not at all concerned that foreigners can own American property and I am glad Americans can own real estate in other countries. To my way of thinking, this is a good thing. A more integrated world is a less dangerous world. Ask yourself, “Do you think the Japanese would have been as likely to have bombed Hawaii, if they would have had the same level of investment in Hawaii prior to Pearl Harbor as they have now?”

Top Stories

Illegal Immigrants are a Good Mortgage Risk

In a recent Tennessean article, columnist Phil Valentine speculated that the reason we are experiencing a mortgage crisis is because illegal immigrants are getting home mortgages. His basis for this was that several of the nation's leading mortgage companies that are participating in Project Lifeline make mortgages to illegal immigrants. Project Lifeline is a program that will allow people facing a mortgage foreclosure and an additional 30 days to try to work out a plan to avoid foreclosure.

Mr. Valentine’s speculation is contrary to fact. In actuality illegal immigrants are a good mortgage risk. The type of mortgages that illegal immigrant get is called an ITIN mortgage. To qualify, the applicant must have a form of identification known as a matrícula consular, which is an Id card issued by the local Mexican Consulate. (You may want to think of this as their “Illegal Alien” id card.) They must also have a W-7, which is also know as an individual tax identification number (ITIN), insured by the IRS. The ITIN allows the illegal immigrant to pay federal income taxes.

They must have two years income tax returns, two years work history, and a bank account. Their income must be verifiable and stable. They must also have two year history of non-traditional credit which must include two years rent history and three other sources of credit which may be bills they have paid on time such as utility bills or cable TV, or some others monthly bill. This is more documentation and a more stringent standard than is required on lots of other alternative type mortgage products.

According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, ITIN mortgages have a delinquency rate of about 0.5%. That compares with 1% for prime mortgages and 9.3% for subprime mortgages extended to those with spotty credit histories.

Before we jump to conclusion and blame society’s woes on illegal immigrants we should get our facts correct. Mr. Valentine will not let facts get in the way of a good opinion.

Top Stories

Peace Sign Turns 50

The Peace sign turns 50 today, but don't expect me to celebrate. If some deranged Vietnam vet beats the hell out of someone who is celebrating the peace sign turning 50, I might celebrate. Actually that is a little harsh. I'm actually a peace-loving guy myself and don't celebrate violence. However, if some deranged Viet vet did beat up some peace-sign-wearing dude, I would see a certain poetic justice in the act. But really, I don't want to see neo-Nazi or peaceniks get beat up, not one more than the other. In a free country both have the right to express themselves.

I know not everyone who wears a peace sign is an evil person, many just think it is "cool". To many it is just generally associated with the fun of getting stoned and creative music and 'going to San Francisco and wearing a flower in your hair.' Flower Power! Groovy! Peace! Far out! Cool! Many people have no concept of the context of the Peace sign, and it is just a fashion statement. To some, it has no more meaning than the 60's era smiley face. To some it is just a nostalgic relic of the past.

To me however, it is a symbol of those who won the Vietnam war on behalf of the Viet Cong. It represents those who gave aid and comfort and encouragement to our enemy. It is the banner that prolonged the war and caused more death and destruction. When I see the Peace sign I think of those who marched and chanted "Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh" and burned American flags and spit on returning vets. It is the symbol of those who hated America and allied with our enemies. It represents the worst of my generation.

The Vietnam war was not won by the Communist in the jungles of Vietnam but was won by the "Peace" activist on the college campuses and the streets of America and the peace sign was the banner under which they marched. Those who marched under that banner can take credit for millions of deaths at the hands of the Communist, for many millions more who were enslaved and for prolonging the cold war for an extra thirty years. The Peace sign represents to me those in the Communist fifth column who stabbed us in the back. If you want to offend me, the Nazi swastika, the Communist hammer and sickle, "KKK", and the Peace sign are all symbols that will do the trick.

Top Stories

Are Illegal Immigrants Causing the Mortgage Crisis?

In the Middle Ages, people used to blame plagues and crop failures on witches; now, many Americans blame everything from crime to unemployment on illegal aliens. Nashville’s own Rush-Limbaugh-Want-a-Be, Phil Valentine, makes the absurd assertion that the subprime mortgage crisis is a result of mortgage companies making mortgage loans to Illegal immigrants. (See: Stop Bank's catering to ….. ) He makes this leap in logic because the participating lenders in Project Lifeline make loans to illegal immigrants.

Project Lifeline is a program that will allow people facing a mortgage foreclosure an additional 30 days to try to work out a plan to avoid foreclosure. While it is true that several of the mortgage companies involved in Project Lifeline do make loans to illegal immigrants, these are the largest mortgage companies in the nation and they make loans to everyone. Only a very small fraction of their loans are made to illegal immigrants. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest the sub prime crisis is a result of loans made to illegals. Mr. Valentine offers no evidence to support his conclusion.

One has to be cautious in making leaps in logic like the one that Mr. Valentine made. These same mortgage companies also make loans to red headed people and people with the last name of “Valentine.” Valentine not only does not offer proof, he does not even show a correlation.

People who carry cigarette lighter have a higher incident of lung cancer. That is a correlation, but even that does not show cause and effect.

Top Stories