Posted on 07/29/2009 5:03:27 PM PDT by AAABEST
He started on his second Bloody Mary, finished at his eighth, and had another six while he edited.
Mr. Fleming should try some pot next time. It'll make less of a mess on his counter and on his page.
The article come from “Chronicles Magazine”
They are the Paleos, anti war, anti semitic,
They live in their bunkers with their eyes closed.
and of no good use to society.
A decade ago I read some diatribe in the MSM against Free Republic. So I checked FR out and I’ve been here ever since.
The same thing happened with “Chronicles” and I became a subscriber. I also subscribe to NR but never to TWS. Of the three, if I had to give one up, it would be NR.
LMAO. Nailed it!
Fleming describes Anschutz as a Christian Conservative, which is a understatement, since Anschutz is one of the primary financial backers of the Discovery Institute(Intelligent Design).
My own take on this is that Anschutz wants to create a winning coalition of neocons and theocons to conquer the GOP, the nation, and the world.
Hey, thanks for the link!
I never heard of Imprimis before now, either.
and that college looks interesting, as well.
FR is a great place to learn - thanks!
I get Imprimus too and enjoy alot of the articles. And I just saw Hillsdale is one of the top 10 conservative universities in the country.
Don't be so modest Thomas, it's obvious that you're feeling, thinking and writing in a much more 'refreshed' state than is possible with only two Bloody Marys.
For all the “Who the hell even reads TWS” snotty attitude this dude has, at least I’ve heard of the Weakly Standard. WTF is Chronicles magazine?
You’re very welcome!
:-)
But dancing on the grave of the WS just looks petty. I'm no neocon, but I met both Irving and Bill Kristol and both gentlemen were infinitely kind to me. Back in the eighties the only three publications that were behind President Reagan were the National Review, the American Spectator, and Commentary Magazine.
I'm one of the Christians Buchanan and others bash for supporting Israel. I don't apologize for that.
I liked this article, especially that description that TWS mostly just went along with everyone else, but when they didn’t they were wrong.
It's pretty good.
My favorite is the American Spectator.
The National Review has slipped a lot since Buckley died.
I don’t read the Weekly Standard, so I don’t know if its demise would be good or bad. But all I can gleam from this piece is that the Weekly Standard sold for $1 million, and that the author would say, “I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it! I hate it!”
The piece’s language is so invective, I instinctively question its characterizations, and it’s nearly devoid of objective facts to support its characterizations.
Bookmarked for good account of recent paleo vs neo/theo history.
Some of the best grave dancing and spitting I’ve ever witnessed.
Save me a spot on Taki’s next cruise!
“It would not be so bad if their platitudinous conventional wisdom were at least some form of knee-jerk conservatism or capitalist greed, but it is neither. Bill’s father Irving (popularly known as “the godfather”), was famous for giving “two cheers for capitalism.” (They can’t even be clever without imitating someone, in this case E.M. Forster). But Irving’s politics have only evolved from his original Trotskyism to a cross between Swedish socialism and Taiwan’s state capitalism. The amiable dimwit Fred Barnes spilled the beans, as he so often does, when he called for big government conservatism. Fred was not quite bright enough to realize that he was uttering a contradiction in terms, and The Weekly Standard’s ideology is, at best, New Republic lite”
OUCH!!!
“The Weekly Standard did only two things. On the positive side, it provided a living for writers who cannot write and political intellectuals without intellect, but it also contributed to the senile dementia that has afflicted the conservative mind since the election of Ronald Reagan. Bill Kristol did not destroy conservatism all by himself. His father was a much more destructive force, but it would be a grave mistake to attribute too much blame to the Kristols and Podhoretzes. They were welcomed with open arms by the unprincipled leadership of the conservative movement. Parasites do not generally destroy a healthy organism. Of course, there were still good people working for Heritage, in the 1980’s, and writing for National Review, but the lightning success of the neoconservative Putsch was as revealing as Hitler’s Anschluss (the annexation of Austria that met with so little resistance.)”
OH SNAP!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.