Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: Stan Should Have Seen It Coming Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/stan_should_have_seen_it_coming#15255 Post contents: <I>Something tells me that this drift into Big Government Conservatism by the NR is only a natural occurrence for a publishing business</I> It wasn't a drift. It was Big Gov't with a bullet from the get go. <I>It soon appears that Buckley is really, in 1952 terms, a totalitarian socialist, and what is more, admits it.</I> <I>He admits that his opposition to Statism, eloquently expressed at the beginning, is merely romantic academicism. For Buckley favors: "the extensive and productive tax laws that are needed to support a vigorous anti-Communist foreign policy," and by implication supports ECA aid and 50-billion dollar "defense" budgets. He declares that the "thus far invincible aggressiveness of the Soviet Union imminently threatens U.S. security," and that therefore "we have got to accept Big Government for the duration–for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged...except through the instrumentality of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores." Therefore, he concludes, we must all support "large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards and the attendant centralization of power in Washington–even with Truman at the reins of it all."</I> <I>In the light of this errant nonsense, Buckley, considered by practically everybody (and, saddest to relate, by himself) as an "extreme individualist" must be classified as a defacto totalitarian.</I> http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard6.html Garet Garret was right in 1938. http://www.rooseveltmyth.com/docs/The_Revolution_Was.html The Revolution won. Liberty lost. Ever since then the decline into totalitarianism has been, and will continue to be, unstoppable. All we few liberty loving conservatives can do is to try and learn as much as we can, from such men as Mr. Gottfried, and pass on the truth to our children. As a "movement," we is dead. Sure,the occasional Paul campaign (or Howard Phillips, or Harry Browne, or Pat Buchanan) will come along there will be moments of fun and great memories and talk about The Constitution as the Rule of Law, etc. But, come on. Have you ever listened to Rush, Hannity, or Beck? They have never, and will never, ask any of their guests if they can justify any of their votes by identifying the specific Constitutional provision authorising them to legislate or act in that area. And THEY are the face of the "Conservative" movement supposedly closest to the people. And they bray INCESSANTLY about The Constitution. I remember how Robert Bork was excoriated when he noted the 10th Amendment was a dead letter. He was right, of course. But he should have remained mute on the point. While I was living in Maine, I got a chance to publicly ask Rep Baldacci (Democrat Dim Wit, Penobscot County) how his Congressional voting record could be reconciled with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of The Constitution. He had NO idea what they were. I had to tell him. Afterwards, my friends were mad at ME because I had "put him on the spot." When I told them a politician who did not know the Ninth and Tenth Amendments was as dumb and dangerous as a Priest who did not know the Ninth and Tenth Commandments they responded with anger and frustration. Who could be expected to know such a thing? And that describes the reality all around us. Few know. Fewer care. Sent at: 2008 05 16