Good, if brief, discussion here.
Buckley was influenced both by a Cold War conservatism that emphasized American ideals and an older conservatism that understood the rootedness of normal countries in history and place. Believers in the latter have sometimes been guilty of indifference in the face of tyranny. Believers in the former without any regard for the older conservatism's sobriety tend to be guilty of something else: liberalism.
Yes, boys and girls, the Wilsonian conceit. Liberalism.
Bush gained my assent on the Iraq adventure only by the slimmest of margins; I assumed he had intel that I did not have. But as to his Second Inaugural foo-dadderie about 'spreading democracy' all over the earth like Glidden paint?
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Wait? So you believed, for the better part of Bush's first term, the administration's complete bulls__t about WMD's because you assumed the "Gummint" knew something you didn't?
So you believe Gummint's B.S. when it's GOP B.S. then? This doesn't seem consistent with your blog theme at all.
You get rhetoric points, but not accuracy points.
Yes, I thought that the CIA, NSA, DIA, (etc.) just may have had info which they shared with GWB, but did NOT share with the general public. I was offended, but hey...
So the invasion 'won', in my mind, on points--it came out 51/49 in favor. By and by that disappeared.
And, by the way, I NEVER believed TThompson's BS, nor Phil Gramm's BS, nor John McPain's BS.
Post a Comment