#Ann Coulter on William F. Buckley
bval...@aol.com
By Ann Coulter
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
As with Ronald Reagan, everyone prefers to remember great men when
they weren't being great, but later, when they were being admired.
Having changed the world, there came a point when Buckley no longer
needed to shock it.
But to call Buckley an "enfant terrible" and then to recall only his
days as a grandee is like calling a liberal actress "courageous." Back
in the day, Buckley truly was courageous. I prefer to remember the
Buckley who scandalized to the bien-pensant.
Other tributes will contain the obvious quotes about demanding a
recount if he won the New York mayoral election and trusting the first
100 names in the Boston telephone book more than the Harvard faculty.
I shall revel in the "terrible" aspects of the enfant terrible.
Buckley's first book, "God and Man at Yale," was met with the usual
thoughtful critiques of anyone who challenges the liberal
establishment. Frank Ashburn wrote in the Saturday Review: "The book
is one which has the glow and appeal of a fiery cross on a hillside at
night. There will undoubtedly be robed figures who gather to it, but
the hoods will not be academic. They will cover the face."
The president of Yale sent alumni thousands of copies of McGeorge
Bundy's review of the book from the Atlantic Monthly calling Buckley a
"twisted and ignorant young man." Other reviews bordered on the
hyperbolic. One critic simply burst into tears, then transcribed his
entire crying jag word for word.
Buckley's next book, "McCarthy and His Enemies," written with L. Brent
Bozell, proved that normal people didn't have to wait for the Venona
Papers to be declassified to see that the Democratic Party was
collaborating with fascists. The book -- and the left's reaction
thereto -- demonstrated that liberals could tolerate a communist
sympathizer, but never a Joe McCarthy sympathizer.
Relevant to Republicans' predicament today, National Review did not
endorse a candidate for president in 1956, correctly concluding that
Dwight Eisenhower was not a conservative, however great a military
leader he had been. In his defense, Ike never demanded that camps
housing enemy detainees be closed down.
Nor would National Review endorse liberal Republican Richard Nixon,
waiting until 1964 to enthusiastically support a candidate for
president who had no hope of winning. Barry Goldwater, though given
the right things to say -- often by Buckley or Bozell, who wrote
Goldwater's "Conscience of a Conservative" -- was not particularly
bright.
But the Goldwater candidacy, Buckley believed, would provide "the well-
planted seeds of hope," eventually fulfilled by Ronald Reagan.
Goldwater was sort of the army ant on whose body Reagan walked to
greatness. Thanks, Barry. When later challenged on Reagan's
intellectual stature, Buckley said: "Of course, he will always tend to
reach first for an anecdote. But then, so does the New Testament."
With liberal Republicans still bothering everyone even after Reagan,
Buckley went all out against liberal Republican Sen. Lowell P. Weicker
Jr. When Democrat Joe Lieberman challenged Weicker for the Senate in
1988, National Review ran an article subtly titled: "Does Lowell
Weicker Make You Sick?"
Buckley started a political action committee to support Lieberman,
explaining, "We want to pass the word that it's OK to vote for the
other guy or stay at home." The good thing about Lieberman, Buckley
said, was that he "doesn't have the tendency of appalling you every
time he opens his mouth."
That same year, when the radical chic composer Leonard Bernstein
complained about the smearing of the word "liberal," Buckley replied:
"Lenny does not realize that one of the reasons the 'L' word is
discredited is that it was handled by such as Leonard Bernstein." The
composer was so unnerved by this remark that, just to cheer himself
up, he invited several extra Black Panthers to his next cocktail
party.
When Arthur Schlesinger Jr. objected to his words being used as a
jacket-flap endorsement on one of Buckley's books in 1963, Buckley
replied by telegram:
"MY OFFICE HAS COPY OF ORIGINAL TAPE. TELL ARTHUR THAT'LL TEACH HIM TO
USE UNCTION IN POLITICAL DEBATE BUT NOT TO TAKE IT SO HARD: NO ONE
BELIEVES ANYTHING HE SAYS ANYWAY."
In a famous exchange with Gore Vidal in 1968, Vidal said to Buckley:
"As far as I am concerned, the only crypto Nazi I can think of is
yourself."
Buckley replied: "Now listen, you queer. Stop calling me a crypto
Nazi, or I'll sock you in your goddamn face and you'll stay
plastered."
Years later, in 1985, Buckley said of the incident: "We both acted
irresponsibly. I'm not a Nazi, but he is, I suppose, a fag."
Writing in defense of the rich in 1967, Buckley said: "My guess is,
that the last man to corner the soybean market, whoever he was, put at
least as much time and creative energy into the cornering of it as,
say, Norman Mailer put into his latest novel and produced something
far more bearable -- better a rise in the price of soybeans than 'Why
Are We in Vietnam?'" (For you kids out there, Norman Mailer was an
America-hating drunkard who wrote books.)
Some of Buckley's best lines were uttered in court during a lengthy
libel trial in the '80s against National Review brought by the Liberty
Lobby, which was then countersued by National Review. (The Liberty
Lobby lost and NR won.)
Irritated by attorney Mark Lane's questions, Buckley asked the judge:
"Your Honor, when he asks a ludicrous question, how am I supposed to
behave?"
In response to another of Lane's questions, Buckley said: "I decline
to answer that question; it's too stupid."
When asked if he had "referred to Jesse Jackson as an ignoramus,"
Buckley said, "If I didn't, I should have."
Buckley may have been a conservative celebrity, but there was a lot
more to him than a bow tie and a sailboat.
Keating Five
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c818f7b3-c52c-4cdd...@q78g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> By Ann Coulter
> Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
Buck used to get his ass kicked by Gore Vidal on a daily basis.
bval...@aol.com
> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> > By Ann Coulter
> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
.
> Buck used to get his ass kicked by Gore Vidal on a daily basis.
Gore Vidal is all but forgotten, while Buckley is more alive than
ever.
Say what you will about Buckley, he never had anything to do with
making a pornographic movie starring Rex Reed and May West. Mr.
Buckley also never allowed a play he wrote be turned into a movie
starring Jerry Lewis. Sadly, the same can't be said for the obscure
Vidal.
Keating Five
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6ffc5437-30a0-49b9...@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Wasn't pornographic, it was a comedy. You should stick to Cosby reruns and
other sugar-coated pap.
Kevin Cunningham
Geez, man, I can't stop laughing! Ann "The Man" Coulter????!!!!
This is what happened to conservatism, they used up their best and
brightest early on. Now were left with the memory of Buckley's bad
politics and cheap wig. Now conservatives are left with Ann and Rush
after Buckley and Goldwater. That wasn't a big hill to come down off
of but geez, can't you do a bit better?
Ann "He/She" Coulter, wow, I thought you would do a bit better...
MFOgilvie
> On Feb 28, 2:55 am, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > .> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> > > > By Ann Coulter
> > > > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
> > .
> > > > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
> > .
> > > Buck used to get his ass kicked by Gore Vidal on a daily basis.
>
> > .
> > Gore Vidal is all but forgotten, while Buckley is more alive than
> > ever.
>
> > Say what you will about Buckley, he never had anything to do with
> > making a pornographic movie starring Rex Reed and May West. Mr.
> > Buckley also never allowed a play he wrote be turned into a movie
> > starring Jerry Lewis. Sadly, the same can't be said for the obscure
> > Vidal.
>
> Geez, man, I can't stop laughing! Ann "The Man" Coulter????!!!!
>
> This is what happened to conservatism, they used up their best and
> brightest early on. Now were left with the memory of Buckley's bad
> politics and cheap wig. Now conservatives are left with Ann and Rush
> after Buckley and Goldwater.
Jealousy will get you nowhere.
bval...@aol.com
> >> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> >> > By Ann Coulter
> >> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
.
> >> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
.
> >> Buck used to get his ass kicked by Gore Vidal on a daily basis.
.
> > Gore Vidal is all but forgotten, while Buckley is more alive than
> > ever.
.
> > Say what you will about Buckley, he never had anything to do with
> > making a pornographic movie starring Rex Reed and May West. Mr.
> > Buckley also never allowed a play he wrote be turned into a movie
> > starring Jerry Lewis. Sadly, the same can't be said for the obscure
> > Vidal.
> Wasn't pornographic,>
.
It was "X" rated when released. I agree that it wasn't the least bit
erotic, but that was a result of its incompetence rather than any
sense of decency. Somehow, Gore Vidal manges to make Raquel Welsh
anally raping a southern stud and then seducing his girlfriend (played
by a young Farrah Fawcett) dull! Don't know how he did it, but I
guess stomping on happiness is his Vidal's only real talent.
.
> it was a comedy.>
It was supposed to be a comedy - sadly, there's literally not a single
laugh in the piece. Mind you, it has all the ingredients to be fun:
A bitter homosexual (Rex Reed, playing Gore's alter ego) has a sex
change operation and turns into Raquel Welsh. He/she then uses his/her
newly acquired feminine charms to wreck havoc, humiliate and destroy
lives where he/she can. Yeah, a Fruedian would have a LOT of fun with
this piece.
The film's basic idea has potential, but Gore Vidal's glum,
condescending and arrogant attitudes permeates and destroys every
aspect of the project. There is not a drop of joy or fun in a single
frame of the film - what remains are a bunch of people acting very
pleased with themselves for no discernible reason.
For a while, 20th Century Fox tried to sell this as a follow-up to
Rocky Horror, or an alternative to Plan Nine From Outer Space, but it
lacks the former's self deprecating wit or the latter's dogged
sincerity.
.
>You should stick to Cosby reruns and other sugar-coated pap.
.
"The Cosby Show?" Is THAT your last pop culture reference? It's a
quarter of a century old!! Are you THAT out of touch?
The easy targets to attack these days are "Two And A Half Men" or "The
World According to Jim".
bval...@aol.com
> > .> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> > > > By Ann Coulter
> > > > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
.
> > > > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
.
> > > Buck used to get his ass kicked by Gore Vidal on a daily basis.
.
> > Gore Vidal is all but forgotten, while Buckley is more alive than
> > ever.
.
> > Say what you will about Buckley, he never had anything to do with
> > making a pornographic movie starring Rex Reed and May West. Mr.
> > Buckley also never allowed a play he wrote be turned into a movie
> > starring Jerry Lewis. Sadly, the same can't be said for the obscure
> > Vidal.
.
> Geez, man, I can't stop laughing! Ann "The Man" Coulter????!!!!
A man/child who spent a year of his/her life pretending to be a
teenaged girl named Caroline Kindenwhore...
...has the gall to question the sexuality of Ann Coulter?
> This is what happened to conservatism, they used up their best and
> brightest early on. Now were left with the memory of Buckley's bad
> politics and cheap wig. Now conservatives are left with Ann and Rush
> after Buckley and Goldwater. That wasn't a big hill to come down off
> of but geez, can't you do a bit better?
.
Heck, for intellectual powerweights, we have Tony Snow, Hugh Hewitt,
Jonah Goldberg, Mark Stein, Victor Davis Hanson, Bryon York - I could
list hundreds others, Caroline.
Clay
...
> William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> By Ann Coulter
> Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
<excellent article snip>
In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
I say NO.
-C-
Gandalf Grey
"Clay" <clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6de4f5f1-6aca-45c2...@41g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
No. He would have seen she was a psychotic bitch and would have never hired
her in the first place.
bval...@aol.com
> > In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> > disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
> No. He would have seen she was a psychotic bitch and would have never hired
> her in the first place.
No, in his hayday, Buckley would have married Ann.
Wrecking Ball
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7ee62738-8d9c-47f5...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Picture of their kids, McKook and Huckabee:
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/hardpeg/images/hillbillies.jpg
robw
Are you nuts?
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7ee62738-8d9c-47f5...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
3975 Dead
And here I thought he was against same-sex marriage...
Gandalf Grey
Spoken like someone who has no idea what William F. Buckley was like. Not a
surprise. You GOPs are getting dumber every minute.
>
Gandalf Grey
"robw" <nodd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:sLqdnSEYYKtWhlra...@comcast.com...
> ??????
>
> Are you nuts?
These new neocons don't have a clue as to what Buckley was really like or
what he really thought.
They're morons. Remarks like this just prove it.
milt....@gmail.com
Buckley would never have put up with someone like Ann Coulter in the
first place, so he'd never have had to fire her.
milt....@gmail.com
Look... I disagreed with Buckley, politically, on everything. But come
on; he wouldn't have given Ann Coulter the time of day, let alone
(yuck) marry that skank...
Gandalf Grey
<milt....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:564a6894-46b7-4c82...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
And Coulter WAS fired from Buckley's National Review by Jonah Goldberg, with
undoubted agreement by Buckley.
robw
It's apparent he's at least in his fifties. That makes him old enough to
know WFB's tv shows and writings.
Sadly, it makes his comment even more inane.
"Gandalf Grey" <vali...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:47c718aa$0$26246$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com...
Gandalf Grey
> But bvalley isn't "new."
>
> It's apparent he's at least in his fifties. That makes him old enough to
> know WFB's tv shows and writings.
>
> Sadly, it makes his comment even more inane.
So what you're saying is that he isn't young, just stupid.
Wrecking Ball
But only if she gave him a goodbye blow.
bval...@aol.com
> But bvalley isn't "new."
> It's apparent he's at least in his fifties. That makes him old enough to
> know WFB's tv shows and writings.
Are you of the impression that William F. Buckley was some amiable
doormat who would mildly endure uncivil behavior? If so, you don't
know Bill.
His last book "Cancel Your Own God Damned Subscription" presents
several instances of Buckley standing up for himself in no uncertain
terms. The most famous example of the forceful side of the Buckly was
his treat to Gore Vidal ""Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a
crypto-Nazi or I'll sock you in you goddamn face and you'll stay
plastered."
Clay
...
> <milt.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Is there anything (a cite) that supports your "undoubted agreement"
comment?
-C-
wby...@ireland.com
> William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
>By Ann Coulter
>Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
>William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
>As with Ronald Reagan, everyone prefers to remember great men when
>they weren't being great, but later, when they were being admired.
>Having changed the world, there came a point when Buckley no longer
>needed to shock it.
Here's what William Buckley had to say to Ann Coulter, "You're fired!"
Buckley thought much the same about Limbaugh and the rest of the radio
lightweights.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmVhMGI5NGFjZjIxMjBmMTE5N2FlYzgzNGFmZTYzZGQ=
To even mention the shallow thinker Coulter in the same sentence as
Buckley is just plain ignorant. Buckley had true wit - Coulter only
uses words as a cheap exercise in polemics. See Dorothy Parker for the
difference. Damn there's some dumb conservative wannabes out there.
WB Yeats
wby...@ireland.com
> William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
>By Ann Coulter
>Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
>William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
>As with Ronald Reagan, everyone prefers to remember great men when
>they weren't being great, but later, when they were being admired.
>Having changed the world, there came a point when Buckley no longer
>needed to shock it.
>
>But to call Buckley an "enfant terrible" and then to recall only his
>days as a grandee is like calling a liberal actress "courageous." Back
>in the day, Buckley truly was courageous. I prefer to remember the
>Buckley who scandalized to the bien-pensant.
Here's what William Buckley had to say to Ann Coulter, "You're fired!"
znuybv
wrote:
> <bvall...@aol.com> wrote in message
Who is Gore Vidal?
Gandalf Grey
he been in disagreement over the firing, do you honestly believe that he
wouldn't have spoken up?
Try using your head sometime.
"Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:85ed172d-e8f0-4b3b...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
robw
"Gandalf Grey" <vali...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:47c72635$0$17423$9a6e...@news.newshosting.com...
robw
him speak in NYC when I was in college.
I didn't agree with his politics but he didn't strike me as someone who
would put up with a self promoting idiot like Coulter.
(you got smacked around a little on this one)
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7a91a385-4547-4c50...@c33g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
robw
"Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:85ed172d-e8f0-4b3b...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
bval...@aol.com
> >> > In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> >> > disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
.
> >> No. He would have seen she was a psychotic bitch and would have never hired
> >> her in the first place.
.
> >No, in his hayday, Buckley would have married Ann.
.
> And here I thought he was against same-sex marriage...
When leftists have nothing of value to say, they yell "racist",
"sexist", "homophobe", or "faggot".
robw
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:69a2f8b8-a90a-4e3e...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
3975 Dead
They do? News to me.
I doubt Ann could have mated with Bill. Wrong number of genes...
bval...@aol.com
A standard fag joke, except that it wasn't funny. Now, HERE is an
actually funny fag joke:
robw
Coulter.
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2ab20cd4-df86-42e6...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Clay
...
> "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:85ed172d-e8f0-4b3b...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 28, 4:23 pm, "Gandalf Grey" wrote:
>
>
> > <milt.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:564a6894-46b7-4c82...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On Feb 28, 3:05 pm, Clay <clays0nl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Feb 28, 2:25 am, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> posted:
> > >> ...
>
> > >> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> > >> > By Ann Coulter
> > >> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> > >> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> > >> <excellent article snip>
>
> > >> In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> > >> disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
>
> > >> I say NO.
>
> > >> -C-
>
> > > Buckley would never have put up with someone like Ann Coulter in the
> > > first place, so he'd never have had to fire her.
>
> > And Coulter WAS fired from Buckley's National Review by Jonah Goldberg,
> > with
> > undoubted agreement by Buckley.
>
> > Is there anything (a cite) that supports your "undoubted agreement"
> > comment?
>
>
> It was Buckley's magazine and he still took an interest in its doings. Had
> he been in disagreement over the firing, do you honestly believe that he
> wouldn't have spoken up?
Translation: you don't have a cite. That's all you had to say.
> Try using your head sometime.
Hmmm... I asked YOU a question, based on what YOU wrote. YOU couldn't
answer it.
Anger at YOURSELF is totally understandable.
Silly... but understandable. Soooo... do ya think I'm gonna....
Nah.
-C-
Gandalf Grey
<wby...@ireland.com> wrote in message
news:p4ees39iordfop20h...@4ax.com...
Yeah. I never agreed with Buckley on much, but the simple truth is that
Buckley's bowel movements were more intelligent than Coulter will ever be.
Clay
...
> Do you think that if Buckley had not wanted her gone......?
I read that WFB "stepped down" from his position way back in 1990.
Is that what you read too?
-C-
MikeC
>
> Yeah. I never agreed with Buckley on much, but the simple truth is that
> Buckley's bowel movements were more intelligent than Coulter will ever be.
Quoted for truth. What happened to intelligent Conservatism? Ann's a
hack by almost any measure.
wby...@ireland.com
Outside of drug legalization and Iraq I didn't agree much with him
either except that 1) he had the mind and intelligence to back up most
of what he believed, and 2) the level of civility defines the
discussion rather than the volume.
WB Yeats
3975 Dead
I read the link, and damn, I'm still laughing. It's not often you see
a magazine blast a columnist for unprofessionalism like that.
Clay
...
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:43:14 -0800, wbye...@ireland.com wrote:
> >On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:25:25 -0800 (PST), "bvall...@aol.com"
> ><bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> >>By Ann Coulter
> >>Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> >>William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> >>As with Ronald Reagan, everyone prefers to remember great men when
> >>they weren't being great, but later, when they were being admired.
> >>Having changed the world, there came a point when Buckley no longer
> >>needed to shock it.
>
> >>But to call Buckley an "enfant terrible" and then to recall only his
> >>days as a grandee is like calling a liberal actress "courageous." Back
> >>in the day, Buckley truly was courageous. I prefer to remember the
> >>Buckley who scandalized to the bien-pensant.
>
> >Here's what William Buckley had to say to Ann Coulter, "You're fired!"
> >Buckley thought much the same about Limbaugh and the rest of the radio
> >lightweights.
>
> >http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmVhMGI5NGFjZjIxMjBmMTE5N2FlYzgz...
>
> >To even mention the shallow thinker Coulter in the same sentence as
> >Buckley is just plain ignorant. Buckley had true wit - Coulter only
> >uses words as a cheap exercise in polemics. See Dorothy Parker for the
> >difference. Damn there's some dumb conservative wannabes out there.
>
> >WB Yeats
>
> I read the link, and damn, I'm still laughing. It's not often you see
> a magazine blast a columnist for unprofessionalism like that.
It freed her up to go on and sell a lot of books.
And she's a very hot ticket as a speaker.
Good for NR & good for her.
It was a "win/win".
-C-
bval...@aol.com
> You seem way too intelligent to fall for the shenanigans of a fraud like
> Coulter.
And why is she a fraud? Because you say so?
It seems to me that if she's pissing off the lefties this badly, she's
doing SOMETHING right.
bval...@aol.com
>Yeah. I never agreed with Buckley on much, but the simple truth is that
> Buckley's bowel movements were more intelligent than Coulter will ever be.
.
So, he guy who's reduced to poo-poo "jokes" decides who is and is not
intelligent?
3975 Dead
wrote:
Porn and soap operas are popular, too.
>
>-C-
Gandalf Grey
through all that pain, moron.
"Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:28eaae20-dd71-49ba...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Baldin Lee Pramer
> On Feb 28, 2:25 am, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> posted:
> ...
>
> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> > By Ann Coulter
> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> <excellent article snip>
>
> In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
>
> I say NO.
He never would have hired her in the first place. He had too much
class and intelligence. Buckley had no tolerance for intellectual
lightweights.
BLP
Clay
cannot:
...
>> Translation: You obviously can't use your head. Sorry for putting you
>> through all that pain, moron.
Tsk, tsk... you began this by your silly remark: "undoubted
agreement". When called to prove what you wrote, you could not and
still cannot.
You're not too good at this, are you. This one's just for you...
Too fucking funny.
-C-
Baldin Lee Pramer
> .> But bvalley isn't "new."
> .
> > It's apparent he's at least in his fifties. That makes him old enough to
> > know WFB's tv shows and writings.
>
> .
> Are you of the impression that William F. Buckley was some amiable
> doormat who would mildly endure uncivil behavior?
Of course he wasn't. That is why he despised Ann Coulter.
BLP
Baldin Lee Pramer
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:25:25 -0800 (PST), "bvall...@aol.com"
>
>
>
> <bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> >By Ann Coulter
> >Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> >William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> >As with Ronald Reagan, everyone prefers to remember great men when
> >they weren't being great, but later, when they were being admired.
> >Having changed the world, there came a point when Buckley no longer
> >needed to shock it.
>
> >But to call Buckley an "enfant terrible" and then to recall only his
> >days as a grandee is like calling a liberal actress "courageous." Back
> >in the day, Buckley truly was courageous. I prefer to remember the
> >Buckley who scandalized to the bien-pensant.
>
> Here's what William Buckley had to say to Ann Coulter, "You're fired!"
> Buckley thought much the same about Limbaugh and the rest of the radio
> lightweights.
>
>
> To even mention the shallow thinker Coulter in the same sentence as
> Buckley is just plain ignorant.
Indeed. It is Clay talking.
BLP
Baldin Lee Pramer
> On Feb 28, 2:25 am, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> posted:
> ...
>
> > By Ann Coulter
> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
>
> In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
>
> I say NO.
I suspect that his standards are at least as high as Jonah Goldbergs.
Apparently you know very little about William F. Buckley.
Hey, Clarence, remember this? Sure you do.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmVhMGI5NGFjZjIxMjBmMTE5N2FlYzgzNGFmZTYzZGQ=
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
L'Affaire Coulter
Goodbye to all that.
By Jonah Goldberg
Dear Readers,
As many of you may have heard, we've dropped Ann Coulter's column from
NRO. This has sparked varying amounts of protest, support, and, most
of all, curiosity from our readers. We owe you an explanation.
Of course, we would explain our decision to Ann, but the reality is
that she's called the shots from the get-go. It was Ann who decided to
sever her ties with National Review -- not the other way around.
This is what happened.
In the wake of her invade-and-Christianize-them column, Coulter wrote
a long, rambling rant of a response to her critics that was barely
coherent. She's a smart and funny person, but this was Ann at her
worst -- emoting rather than thinking, and badly needing editing and
some self-censorship, or what is commonly referred to as "judgment."
Running this "piece" would have been an embarrassment to Ann, and to
NRO. Rich Lowry pointed this out to her in an e-mail (I was returning
from my honeymoon). She wrote back an angry response, defending
herself from the charge that she hates Muslims and wants to convert
them at gunpoint.
But this was not the point. It was NEVER the point. The problem with
Ann's first column was its sloppiness of expression and thought. Ann
didn't fail as a person -- as all her critics on the Left say -- she
failed as WRITER, which for us is almost as bad.
Rich wrote her another e-mail, engaging her on this point, and asking
her -- in more diplomatic terms -- to approach the whole controversy not
as a PR-hungry, free-swinging pundit on Geraldo, but as a careful
writer.
No response.
Instead, she apparently proceeded to run around town bad-mouthing NR
and its employees. Then she showed up on TV and, in an attempt to
ingratiate herself with fellow martyr Bill Maher, said we were
"censoring" her.
By this point, it was clear she wasn't interested in continuing the
relationship.
What publication on earth would continue a relationship with a writer
who would refuse to discuss her work with her editors? What
publication would continue to publish a writer who attacked it on TV?
What publication would continue to publish a writer who lied about it
-- on TV and to a Washington Post reporter?
And, finally, what CONSERVATIVE publication would continue to publish
a writer who doesn't even know the meaning of the word "censorship"?
So let me be clear: We did not "fire" Ann for what she wrote, even
though it was poorly written and sloppy. We ended the relationship
because she behaved with a total lack of professionalism, friendship,
and loyalty.
What's Ann's take on all this? Well, she told the Washington Post
yesterday that she loves it, because she's gotten lots of great
publicity. That pretty much sums Ann up.
On the Sean Hannity show yesterday, however, apparently embarrassed by
her admission to the Post, she actually tried to deny that she has
sought publicity in this whole matter. Well, then, Ann, why did you
complain of being "censored" on national TV? Why did you brag to the
Post about all the PR?
Listening to Ann legalistically dodge around trying to explain all
this would have made Bill Clinton blush.
Ann also told the Post that we only paid her $5 a month for her work
(would that it were so!). Either this is a deliberate lie, or Ann
needs to call her accountant because someone's been skimming her
checks.
Many readers have asked, why did we run the original column in which
Ann declared we should "invade their countries, kill their leaders and
convert them to Christianity" -- if we didn't like it?
Well, to be honest, it was a mistake. It stemmed from the fact this
was a supposedly pre-edited syndicated column, coming in when NRO was
operating with one phone line and in general chaos. Our bad.
Now as far as Ann's charges go, I must say it's hard to defend against
them, because they either constitute publicity-minded name-calling,
like calling us "girly-boys" -- or they're so much absurd bombast.
For example:
Ann -- a self-described "constitutional lawyer" -- volunteered on
Politically Incorrect that our "censoring" of her column was
tantamount to "repealing the First Amendment." Apparently, in Ann's
mind, she constitutes the thin blonde line between freedom and
tyranny, and so any editorial decision she dislikes must be a
travesty.
She sniffed to the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz that "Every once
in awhile they'll [National Review] throw one of their people to the
wolves to get good press in left-wing publications." I take personal
offense to this charge. She's accusing us of betraying a friend for
publicity, when in fact it was the other way around.
And, lastly, this "Joan of Arc battling the forces of political
correctness" act doesn't wash. In the same 20 days in which Ann says --
over and over and over again -- that NR has succumbed to "PC hysteria,"
we've run pieces celebrating every PC shibboleth and bogeyman.
Paul Johnson has criticized Islam as an imperial religion. William
F. Buckley himself has called, essentially, for a holy war. Rich Lowry
wants to bring back the Shah, and I've written that Western
Civilization has every right to wave the giant foam "We're Number 1!"
finger as high as it wants.
The only difference between what we've run and what Ann considers
so bravely iconoclastic on her part, is that we've run articles that
accord persuasion higher value than shock value. It's true: Ann is
fearless, in person and in her writing. But fearlessness isn't an
excuse for crappy writing or crappier behavior.
To be honest, even though there's a lot more that could be said, I
have no desire to get any deeper into this because, like with a
Fellini movie, the deeper you get, the less sense Ann makes.
We're delighted that FrontPageMagazine has, with remarkable bravery,
picked up Ann's column, presumably for only $5 a month. They'll be
getting more than what they're paying for, I'm sure.
-- Jonah Goldberg
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sir Baldin Lee Pramer, RPA
Wrecking Ball
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2ab20cd4-df86-42e6...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Calling Gore a "Fag" is funny?
Gandalf Grey
Jr. That's more apparent with your every post.
"Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote yet more crap in message
news:93589810-6866-47c7...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
...
>
>>> "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote more crap in message
>>>
>>>
>>> > "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote some initial crap in message
bval...@aol.com
> Porn and soap operas are popular, too.
A very popular belief among people who haven't done much with their
lives.
bval...@aol.com
> > > It's apparent he's at least in his fifties. That makes him old enough to
> > > know WFB's tv shows and writings.
.
> > Are you of the impression that William F. Buckley was some amiable
> > doormat who would mildly endure uncivil behavior?
> Of course he wasn't. That is why he despised Ann Coulter.
The only turd in the punchbowl is the fact that Buckley didn't despise
Ann Coulter.
bval...@aol.com
wrote:
> <bvall...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2ab20cd4-df86-42e6...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Feb 28, 3:53 pm, "robw" <noddy...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> It's the Adam's Apple joke.
.
> > A standard fag joke, except that it wasn't funny. Now, HERE is an
> > actually funny fag joke:
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ehbcO6r4tA"
.
> Calling Gore a "Fag" is funny?
Comedy gold, baby!!!!!
Harold Burton
"Wrecking Ball" <Buckley-...@crawford.net> wrote:
Nah, calling Gore a living entity is funny.
Gandalf Grey
"Harold Turdton" <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-8E3B...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Calling you provisionally human is funny, Turdton.
Harold Burton
"Gandalf Grey" <vali...@gmail.com> wrote:
Gettting an idiot like you to respond to a "provisionally human" is even
funnier.
Snicker.
robw
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:3d847263-322f-43ad...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
robw
She makes it easy.
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4ec1c856-dc87-4107...@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
robw
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2c8cd667-20e7-4d77...@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
robw
opposed the firing????
"Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:28eaae20-dd71-49ba...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 28, 6:21 pm, "Gandalf Grey" couldn't... no big deal:
...
> "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Translation: you don't have a cite. That's all you had to say.
> Try using your head sometime.
Hmmm... I asked YOU a question, based on what YOU wrote. YOU couldn't
answer it.
Anger at YOURSELF is totally understandable.
Silly... but understandable. Soooo... do ya think I'm gonna....
Nah.
-C-
robw
think he would have opposed the firing???
It's a yes or no question.
"Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:93589810-6866-47c7...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
robw
"Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b5d2c40b-65dd-46f1...@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 28, 6:36 pm, "robw" <noddy...@comcast.net> wrote:
...
> Do you think that if Buckley had not wanted her gone......?
I read that WFB "stepped down" from his position way back in 1990.
Is that what you read too?
-C-
zzbu...@netscape.net
> <milt.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:564a6894-46b7-4c82...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 28, 3:05 pm, Clay <clays0nl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Feb 28, 2:25 am, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> posted:
> >> ...
>
> >> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> >> > By Ann Coulter
> >> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> >> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> >> <excellent article snip>
>
> >> In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> >> disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
>
> >> I say NO.
>
> >> -C-
>
> > Buckley would never have put up with someone like Ann Coulter in the
> > first place, so he'd never have had to fire her.
>
> And Coulter WAS fired from Buckley's National Review by Jonah Goldberg, with
But, what the neither the fictional crank generator, Buckley,
nor his polemic National Review, nor Coultier, seemed to ever
catch on to, is that electronic computers, Digital TV, Email,
Ebooks, Internet,
Fiber Optics, PBS, Laser Printers, GPS, CD, DVD, and Robots, were
all instituted
for the quite simple reason, that all three of the previously-
mentioned are quite
simply seen to be RCA-generated Sunday Monday econo-idiots.
>
> - Show quoted text -
robw
You were an editor?
When were smut comics published in that language????
Took the first job you could get?
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:d27f103a-79c2-40b2...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
robw
guess porn's had a part of your life.
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1adec6e9-dcc8-456e...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
bval...@aol.com
> Did Buckley oppose her firing?
He was retired at the time.
Wrecking Ball
"Harold Burton" <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-74A0...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Coulter isn't human, she's a neanderthal throwback.
Wrecking Ball
On Feb 28, 7:50 pm, 3975 Dead <ze...@finestplanet.com> wrote:
...
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:43:14 -0800, wbye...@ireland.com wrote:
> >On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 23:25:25 -0800 (PST), "bvall...@aol.com"
> ><bvall...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> >>By Ann Coulter
> >>Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> >>William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> >>As with Ronald Reagan, everyone prefers to remember great men when
> >>they weren't being great, but later, when they were being admired.
> >>Having changed the world, there came a point when Buckley no longer
> >>needed to shock it.
>
> >>But to call Buckley an "enfant terrible" and then to recall only his
> >>days as a grandee is like calling a liberal actress "courageous." Back
> >>in the day, Buckley truly was courageous. I prefer to remember the
> >>Buckley who scandalized to the bien-pensant.
>
> >Here's what William Buckley had to say to Ann Coulter, "You're fired!"
> >Buckley thought much the same about Limbaugh and the rest of the radio
> >lightweights.
>
> >http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmVhMGI5NGFjZjIxMjBmMTE5N2FlYzgz...
>
> >To even mention the shallow thinker Coulter in the same sentence as
> >Buckley is just plain ignorant. Buckley had true wit - Coulter only
> >uses words as a cheap exercise in polemics. See Dorothy Parker for the
> >difference. Damn there's some dumb conservative wannabes out there.
>
> >WB Yeats
>
> I read the link, and damn, I'm still laughing. It's not often you see
> a magazine blast a columnist for unprofessionalism like that.
It freed her up to go on and sell a lot of books.
And she's a very hot ticket as a speaker.
Good for NR & good for her.
It was a "win/win".
-C-
She's a better target for pies.
Mitchell Holman
$pl4....@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net:
National Review fires Ann Coulter
http://archive.salon.com/politics/red/2001/10/02/blue/index_np.html
USA Today Drops Ann Coulter
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/26/politics/main631949.shtml
Conservative Paper Drops Ann Coulter's Column
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/13/221948.php
Newspapers Drops Coulter's Column
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/07/12/newspapers-drops-coulter_n_
24944.html
Seven Papers Axe Coulter's Column
http://www.prwatch.org/node/5842
Newspapers Pull Ann Coulter's Column
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257745,00.html
Two More Newspapers Drop Ann Coulter's Column
http://www.hostilecrowd.com/story.php?id=3698
More Newspapers Drop Ann Coulter's Column
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/08/politics/main2548912.shtml
bval...@aol.com
> Oh please, when she calls 9-11 widows whores????
The words of Micheal Moore:
"If someone did this [9/11] to get back at Bush, then they did so by
killing thousands of people who DID NOT VOTE for him! Boston, New
York, D.C., and the planes' destination of California -- these were
places that voted AGAINST Bush!" -- Michael Moore On 9/12/2001
"The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not
"insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION,
the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win."
"I'm sorry, but the majority of Americans supported this war once it
began and, sadly, that majority must now sacrifice their children
until enough blood has been let that maybe -- just maybe -- God and
the Iraqi people will forgive us in the end."
"It was when Moore went into a rant about how the passengers on the
planes on 11 September were scaredy-cats because they were mostly
white. If the passengers had included black men, he claimed, those
killers, with their puny bodies and unimpressive small knives, would
have been crushed by the dudes, who as we all know take no disrespect
from anybody." -- From an article by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown describing a
Michael Moore show in London
"You know in my town the small businesses that everyone wanted to
protect? They were the people that supported all the right-wing
groups. They were the Republicans in the town, they were in the
Kiwanas, the Chamber of Commerce - people that kept the town all
white. The small hardware salesman, the small clothing store
salespersons . . . Fuck all these small
businesses - fuck 'em all! Bring in the chains! The small
businesspeople are the rednecks that run the town and suppress the
people. Fuck 'em all. That's how I feel."
bval...@aol.com
> Coulter isn't human, she's a neanderthal throwback.
A weak little boy afraid of a strong woman.
bval...@aol.com
> "So, the guy...."?????
.
> You were an editor?
.
> When were smut comics published in that language????
Penthouse was always published in English.
.
> Took the first job you could get?
I have no idea where that came from.
Wrecking Ball
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:828e63fe-cc47-43d6...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
My wife would argue THAT point. Maybe fagit Coulter should stay home and
bake some cookies, like she advocates for other women.
bval...@aol.com
> > Porn and soap operas are popular, too.
> A very popular belief among people who haven't done much with their lives.
> Um, you edited a porn comic.
.
Excuse me, I didn't edit A porn comic, I edited THE porn comic:
Penthouse Comix, the finest pornographic comic book in history.
We published people like Adam Hughs, Frank Frezetta, Larry Niven, the
top people in the comic book field.
bval...@aol.com
wrote:
> <bvall...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:828e63fe-cc47-43d6...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > .
> >> Coulter isn't human, she's a neanderthal throwback.
> > .
> > A weak little boy afraid of a strong woman.
.
> My wife would argue THAT point.
Two words: Me-ow!
Baldin Lee Pramer
That's what he told me, and he was always a straight shooter.
BLP
Gandalf Grey
"to respond to a 'provisionally' human....", Turdton?
It's certainly fun to watch you prove that you're functionally illiterate.
bval...@aol.com
> That's what he told me, and he was always a straight shooter.
Yeah, William F. Buckley used to rap with a leftist loser who posts
regularly in the "slacker" site.
bval...@aol.com
> (Ann Coulter's) a better target for pies.>
.
"Though liberals do a great deal of talking about
hearing other points of view, it sometimes shocks
them to learn that there are other points of view."
-William F. Buckley
Harold Burton
<828e63fe-cc47-43d6...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
"bval...@aol.com" <bval...@aol.com> wrote:
Galdalf is a typical leftard.
Clay
c "he simply cannot":
...
> "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote yet more crap in messagenews:93589810-6866-47c7...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> >>> "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote more crap in message
>
> >>> > "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote some initial crap in message
>
> >>> >news:85ed172d-e8f0-4b3b...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> >>> > On Feb 28, 4:23 pm, "Gandalf Grey" wrote:
>
> >>> > > <milt.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>> > >news:564a6894-46b7-4c82...@u69g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> > > > On Feb 28, 3:05 pm, Clay <clays0nl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > > >> On Feb 28, 2:25 am, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> posted:
> >>> > > >> ...
>
> >>> > > >> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> >>> > > >> > By Ann Coulter
> >>> > > >> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> >>> > > >> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> >>> > > >> <excellent article snip>
>
> >>> > > >> In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter
> >>> > > >> for
> >>> > > >> disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of
> >>> > > >> peace"?
>
> >>> > > >> I say NO.
>
> >>> > > >> -C-
>
> >>> > > > Buckley would never have put up with someone like Ann Coulter in
> >>> > > > the
> >>> > > > first place, so he'd never have had to fire her.
>
> >>> > > And Coulter WAS fired from Buckley's National Review by Jonah
> >>> > > Goldberg,
> >>> > > with
> >>> > > undoubted agreement by Buckley.
>
> >>> > > Is there anything (a cite) that supports your "undoubted agreement"
> >>> > > comment?
>
> >>> > It was Buckley's magazine and he still took an interest in its doings.
> >>> > Had
> >>> > he been in disagreement over the firing, do you honestly believe that
> >>> > he
> >>> > wouldn't have spoken up?
>
> >>>> Translation: you don't have a cite.
>
> >>> Translation: You obviously can't use your head. Sorry for putting you
> >>> through all that pain, moron.
>
> > Tsk, tsk... you began this by your silly remark: "undoubted
> > agreement". When called to prove what you wrote, you could not and
> > still cannot.
>
> > You're not too good at this, are you. This one's just for you...
>
> > Too fucking funny.
>
> > -C-
>
> You still prove that you know little to nothing about William F. Buckley,
> Jr. That's more apparent with your every post.
==============================
On Feb 28, 4:23 pm, "Gandalf Grey" wrote:
> > > And Coulter WAS fired from Buckley's National Review by
> > > Jonah Goldberg, with
> > > ***undoubted agreement*** by Buckley.
On Feb 28, 5:37 pm, Clay wrote:
> > Is there anything (a cite) that supports your "undoubted agreement"
> > comment?
On Feb 28, 6:21 pm, "Gandalf Grey" wrote:
> <crickets>
> <flailing with anger>
================================
Now, you're getting silly. G.
You made a foolish statement based on uncontrolled emotion. There was
"no thought" behind your comment... you simply reacted with anger and
poor judgement. When called to prove your thoughtless words, you
turned the unbridled fury you felt for Ann Coulter on yourself (for
displaying such ignorance) and then you turned that fury on the person
who asked you for proof.
It's called "transference".
At first, I mocked you deservedly. But now, I feel nothing but pity
for you.
I hope there is someone who is calmer and has tigher grip on the facts
that you can quietly sit with and discuss your obvious problems.
You will be in my prayers.
-C-
Clay
...
> If Buckley had wanted Coulter to continue working for his mag don't you
> think he would have opposed the firing???
>
> It's a yes or no question.
Again, I read that WFB stepped down from day-to-day executive
decisions back in 1990. Given that, your question is ignorant and
foolish.
Lemme put it like this, junior...
"If the Queen had balls, she'd be King."
Hope this helps.
-C-
Clay
Brandy Moonbeam scribbled:
...
> On Feb 28, 1:05 pm, Clay <clays0nl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 28, 2:25 am, "bvall...@aol.com" <bvall...@aol.com> posted:
> > ...
>
> > > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> > > By Ann Coulter
> > > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> > > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
> > <excellent article snip>
>
> > In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> > disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
>
> > I say NO.
>
> I suspect that his standards are at least as high as Jonah Goldbergs.
> Apparently you know very little about William F. Buckley.
You suspect that the moon is made of cheese, Brandy. I posed the
question b/c I was looking for intelligent replies. When and if I
want third-rate comments for ne'er-do-wells, I'll definitely keep you
on the top of my list.
> Hey, Clarence, remember this? Sure you do.
Didn't I dispense with your "Clarence" ignorance in another thread,
Brandon K. Montoya? It's in the archives if you forgot.
> http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MmVhMGI5NGFjZjIxMjBmMTE5N2FlYzgz...
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> L'Affaire Coulter
> Goodbye to all that.
>
> By Jonah Goldberg
<article snip>
Funny, Brandy... I don't think I mentioned Mr. Goldberg... I was clear
when I wrote, "William F. Buckley". It's obvious that when you typed
this, you had been off of your ADD meds.
Didn't the nurse make her rounds, Tlalocelotl Tlatoani?
Too fucking funny.
-C-
Trace
>
> > William F. Buckley: R.I.P., Enfant Terrible
> > By Ann Coulter
> > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
>
> > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
>
Buckley told that faggot off on TV and it was a great moment in
American television history.
Clay
truth... he's a "half-stepper":
...
> "Wrecking Ball" <Buckley--fasci...@crawford.net> wrote in news:RDLxj.3280
> $pl4.2...@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net:
>
>
> > "Clay" <ClaysRi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> National Review fires Ann Coulterhttp://archive.salon.com/politics/red/2001/10/02/blue/index_np.html
>
> USA Today Drops Ann Coulterhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/26/politics/main631949.shtml
>
> Conservative Paper Drops Ann Coulter's Columnhttp://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/13/221948.php
>
> Newspapers Drops Coulter's Columnhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/07/12/newspapers-drops-coulter_n_
> 24944.html
>
> Seven Papers Axe Coulter's Columnhttp://www.prwatch.org/node/5842
>
> Newspapers Pull Ann Coulter's Columnhttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257745,00.html
>
> Two More Newspapers Drop Ann Coulter's Columnhttp://www.hostilecrowd.com/story.php?id=3698
>
> More Newspapers Drop Ann Coulter's Columnhttp://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/08/politics/main2548912.shtml
===========================================
Ann Coulter is the author of SIX BOOKS, all of which have appeared on
New York Times Best Seller list (NYTBSL).
Her first book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill
Clinton (ISBN 0-89526-113-8), was published by Regnery Publishing in
1998. The book details Coulter's case for the impeachment of President
Bill Clinton.
Her second book, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right (ISBN
1-4000-4661-0), published by Crown Forum in 2002, remained number one
on The New York Times Best Seller list for seven weeks. In Slander,
Coulter argues that President George W. Bush was given unfair negative
media coverage.
Her third book, Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the
War on Terrorism (ISBN 1-4000-5030-8), also published by Crown Forum,
defends the presidency of Richard M. Nixon and accused Democratic
politicians and the "liberal media" of undermining United States
foreign policy. She argues that the correct identification of Annie
Lee Moss, among others, as Communists was misreported by that liberal
media. Treason was published in 2003, and spent 13 weeks on the Best
Seller list.
Crown Forum published a collection of Coulter's columns in 2004 as her
fourth book, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World
According to Ann Coulter (ISBN 1-4000-5418-4).
Coulter's fifth book, published by Crown Forum in 2006, is Godless:
The Church of Liberalism (ISBN 1-4000-5420-6). Coulter argues, first,
that liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith,
and second, that it bears all the attributes of a religion itself.
Godless debuted at number one on The New York Times Best Seller list.
Her most recent book, If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be
Republicans, was published in October, 2007.
===========================================
And, folks... that is THE REST OF THE STORY !!!
-C-
Kevin Cunningham
> > > > > By Ann Coulter
> > > > > Wednesday, February 27, 2008
> > > > > William F. Buckley was the original enfant terrible.
> > > > Buck used to get his ass kicked by Gore Vidal on a daily basis.
> > > Gore Vidal is all but forgotten, while Buckley is more alive than
> > > ever.
> .
> > > Say what you will about Buckley, he never had anything to do with
> > > making a pornographic movie starring Rex Reed and May West. Mr.
> > > Buckley also never allowed a play he wrote be turned into a movie
> > > starring Jerry Lewis. Sadly, the same can't be said for the obscure
> > > Vidal.
> .
> > Geez, man, I can't stop laughing! Ann "The Man" Coulter????!!!!
>
> .
> A man/child who spent a year of his/her life pretending to be a
> teenaged girl named Caroline Kindenwhore...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.courtney-love/browse_frm/threa...
>
> ...has the gall to question the sexuality of Ann Coulter?
>
> > This is what happened to conservatism, they used up their best and
> > brightest early on. Now were left with the memory of Buckley's bad
> > politics and cheap wig. Now conservatives are left with Ann and Rush
> > after Buckley and Goldwater. That wasn't a big hill to come down off
> > of but geez, can't you do a bit better?
>
> .
> Heck, for intellectual powerweights, we have Tony Snow, Hugh Hewitt,
> Jonah Goldberg, Mark Stein, Victor Davis Hanson, Bryon York - I could
> list hundreds others, Caroline.
I mean is that the best you have????? Tony Snow????? Geez, you don't
have a big up side if your best and brightest is Tony Snow!
Thought you would have the courage to mention David Brooks but
obviously you don't read or watch "The News Hour". See, Buckley cacks
off and that is just about the end of the idea of the intelligent
conservative. Now Buckley was a racist, just like you, and a virulent
supporter of McCarthy, like I said, not exactly a big intellectual
mountain to climb.
Kevin Cunningham
> In article <ObKxj.7804$Mw.7...@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com>,
> > > On Feb 28, 3:53 pm, "robw" <noddy...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >> It's the Adam's Apple joke.
> > > .
> > > A standard fag joke, except that it wasn't funny. Now, HERE is an
> > > actually funny fag joke:
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ehbcO6r4tA"
>
> > Calling Gore a "Fag" is funny?
>
> Nah, calling Gore a living entity is funny.
Gore is a constant irritant, isn't he? I mean it was so much fun
after delivering a huge beating to him in Florida. But ya' know
what? Gore didn't give up. He kept on doing his thang. And now the
vast, vast majority of people listen to him. A lot more people around
the world than your Great Leader Bush, yep, they listen to Gore who
has won award after award. For instance, he won the Nobel Peace
Prize, a minor triumph, but he did it and the Bushies didn't.
See, you last moral compass, Buckley, is dead and besides that he
wasn't a really great individual. He was head and shoulders above the
comedy acts you normally support but he was a minor player in the
history of the world. But at least he played....
3975 Dead
You know, it's funny: I don't recall William F. Buckley ever getting
fired from any journal or paper. In fact, it was pretty rare for him
to get dropped, even though it's something that happens to every
columnist at one time or another.
Maybe, despite what Silly Billy thinks, there actually was a
difference between Buckley and Coulter in terms of quality.
>
>
>
--
What do you call a Republican with a conscience?
An ex-Republican.
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8827 (From Yang, AthD (h.c)
"Prosperity and peace are in the balance," -- Putsch, not admitting that he's against both
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
Zepps_News...@yahoogroups.com
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
Zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
Mitchell Holman
news:7c4gs39ervi4uf0sd...@4ax.com:
> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:26:33 -0600, Mitchell Holman
> <Noe...@comcast.com> wrote:
>
>>"Wrecking Ball" <Buckley-...@crawford.net> wrote in
>>news:RDLxj.3280 $pl4....@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net:
>>
>>>
>>> "Clay" <Clays...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:0917cc1a-8c0e-4228...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com.
Of course, Buckley was just as capable of spouting odd
ideas, like tatooing AIDS victims and opposing US entry into
WWII but he was civil and polite where Coulter is abusive
and obnoxious.
Baldin Lee Pramer
I am a conservative, BV. Buckley does not "rap"; he converses and he
argues. You would not be able to keep up.
Also, alt.slack is not a "slacker site". It is a newsgroup centered on
the Subgenius religion.
BLP
Wrecking Ball
Wrecking Ball
<bval...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:b9c74737-d421-4889...@s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Never heard of 'em. So why'd ya git farred?
3975 Dead
<Noe...@comcast.com> wrote:
Exactly so. He sometimes even made sense, as when he spoke out
against the WoSD. That's something I've never seen out of Coulter.
Wrecking Ball
"Clay" <clayo...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:c35c0470-ac97-4dc8...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Her most recent book, If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be
Republicans, was published in October, 2007.
===========================================
And, folks... that is THE REST OF THE STORY !!!
-C-
--------------------------
Ooo....... Ingenius............
I think I'll write a book called, "If Mark Foley Wasn't Gay for Kids He'd
Still Be in Congress".
Baldin Lee Pramer
> > > In his heyday, would William F. Buckley have fired Ann Coulter for
> > > disparaging remarks about folks who practice the "religion of peace"?
She was not fired for that reason. Read what Goldberg said.
> > Hey, Clarence, remember this? Sure you do.
>
> Didn't I dispense with your "Clarence"
Your street name is Clarence Lee. Sorry, putz. That is public
knowledge.
> > L'Affaire Coulter
> > Goodbye to all that.
>
> > By Jonah Goldberg
>
> <article snip>
>
> Funny, Brandy... I don't think I mentioned Mr. Goldberg... I was clear
> when I wrote, "William F. Buckley".
You know very little about him if you really believe he would have put
up with Coulter's shit. I think you are distracted by the blond in the
black dress thing. What Goldberg said about her was relevant to her
employment at the National Review, the founding of which was the
achievement that made Bill Buckley most proud. Do you *really* think
he would have published her worst output just because she refused to
be edited? Do you think he was a wimp as well as an idiot?
Show the man some respect. He was one of the greatest conservative
thinkers and one of the most erudite and civilized of modern
Americans.
BLP
wby...@ireland.com
<bval...@aol.com> wrote:
>.
>> Did Buckley oppose her firing?
>.
>He was retired at the time.
And heartily agreed with Coulter's firing, dork.
WB Yeats