Inspiring! I live in the republic of Ireland where evangelicals are about as common as real leprechauns. The country is post-Catholic (since major scandals were made public) and the loud voices in media are anti-Catholic leftists. Christians feel small, fragile, and haven’t seen many people convert to Christianity since the charismatic revival in the 70s-80s. With huge social changes recently like legalising same-sex marriage, repealing protections for the unborn, Christians feel like the bad guys, trying to cling on to a dark past that we weren’t really part of in the first place. But it’s this lack of humour and joy you’re talking about that’s hitting me! I’m exhausted from social interactions. I’m always trying to be winsome about unpopular opinions and carefully trying to help unpick someone’s anti-Christian worldview. I’m genuinely exhausted and feel I’m missing some of this humour and cheekiness that Irish people are actually known for! There are so few people I feel relaxed around enough to be like this with. If you read this please pray for God’s help with my interactions, and that he’d help me feel freer in conversations.
I hear you brother. Just prayed for you. "For the joy set before Him endured the cross." Not sure how that applies but it came to mind as I was reading your post.
Do you think that the Ulster protestants have by and large remained more faithful? There's a stereotype here in England that orangemen are still 'Bible-thumping bigots'!
"...a public intellectual among the rubes and cornpones holding forth in my corner booth at Cracker Barrel" .... hahaha hilarious! I'd like to be right there!
@Jennifer Mugrage I do too when the food is hot... but I don't think he was "dissing" Cracker Barrel... I think he was just accepting the stereotype and/or taking the posture of looking at it ironically/sarcastically through the eyes of the "elites"
I was attracted to NR for the exact same reason, but my reason for leaving was much different. Buckley was a gatekeeper, and I too late realized that "standing athwart history yelling 'stop'" was exactly the ineffectual equivalent of standing on a train track and doing the same. Here we are now, and I think Buckley would be pleased.
Buckley, by commandeering the post-war anti-war, pro market, limited-government right wing, helped to bring about the modern state of centralized bureaucracy we live under in America. His excuse was that we needed this bureaucracy in order to fight communism abroad, but of course it has not been repealed one iota since the collapse of the Soviet Union. He would have done well to take to heart Tolkien's wisdom found in his great epic Lord of the Rings: you can't use the ring to defeat the forces of evil, without yourself becoming its mirrored opposite.
I grew up watching Buckley every weekend, popcorn in hand dazzled by his spectacular vernacular. Imagine my disappointment when I discover, he was a CIA mouthpiece, performing a dialectical act.
Exactly “dazzled by his spectacular vernacular”. This was the problem. He wowed people while he proceeded to divide conservatives in typical CIA fashion.
Controlled opposition, create a false option to your power grab. Your opponents will join this fake opposition, without realizing that it is factory designed to advance the very thing that they are trying to stop. Do conservatives ever catch on? Nope, useful idiots for their enemies, as always.
"... the kind of urbane sophisticates who would know what fork to use when dining with the queen." This is, actually, a big part of the problem with National Review, in my opinion.
National Review went from being so conservative they were against the civil rights legislation of LBJ, to promoting atheist Jews (Jonah Goldberg), gay proponents (Jason Lee Steorts), and elitists whose hatred of their roots in flyover country is without end (Kevin Williamson). These men were promoted because they were good writers, but are they good men? The entire organization was subverted, and most of the subversion happened before WFB's death, which makes me question the project from the beginning. I mean, what kind of rallying cry is 'standing athwart history, yelling stop'? I always knew what National Review was against, but what they were for was far from clear. And as far as stridency is concerned, the time for observing Marquess of Queensbury rules is over. We are facing overt anti-Christian (and anti-whyte) bigotry and repression is this country. We need fighters, for there is no substitute for victory.
We all know that’s the case. But what is the solution. There are millions of people pointing to what’s wrong, but not one willing to lead the charge and say, “follow me.”
@@christophercunningham5434 The only real solutions are the tough ones. On the cultural level, we must reform ourselves and get back to our, if not Catholic, at least Christian roots. On the political level, secession is the only answer which does not involve bloodshed. We're not gong to convince the tens of millions of people in California and New York to reject the sinful habits they've acquired. Those ruts are too deep. Individual conversions will of course occur, but those communities won't be changed for the good until they face a disaster of their own making.
In many ways Pay Buchanan is closer to orthodox Christianity, than most protestant's and Catholics today. Protestant's and Catholics think like classical Greek humanist. Nothing CHristian about them or the way they think about money or anything else.
@@bobhawkins2997 and you mean that he wasn't a blind supporter of the secular Marxist state of Israel. Because naturally, the job of every American citizen is to destroy their country, wreck the reconomy, and lose their freedoms, to get involved in countless Wars to serve a bunch of atheist Marxist socialist that live in the state of Israel. Am I right? Anybody who thinks that the state of Israel cares one rip about the US, the Constitution, Christianity, or American freedoms, they need to have their head examined. But if you don't blindly support every single thing that regime does, you are magically anti-Semitic. Does it take brains? Nope. Does it make sense? Nope. But it certainly shuts people up and gets them to comply.
I started reading NR in my first year of law school in 1983. I, too, have stopped reading for the same reason you mention. I would have enjoyed watching Buckley comment on Trump.
I laughed all the way through this one, especially at the harrumphing. I used to devour NR when my dad got it during the 90s. I thought it was fascinating and funny. I tried to get my own subscription in 2016 and found issue after issue heavy, dull, irrelevant and just...no longer itself. I haven’t read it since 2017.
Wow, this hit home. I just returned from a National Review seminar and boy was it underwhelming. I thought it would be different. It was supposed to be fun and insightful with a touch of irreverent humor and of course cocktails. It was Wonder Bread. I didn't even stay for the cocktail reception. I'm still subscribed to NR currently, but the thought of letting my membership lapse has crossed my mind a couple of times in the last two years. When I read Buckley or watch the Firing Line, I feel the ebullience and Joie de Vivre that Douglas alludes to. Now when I read NR, I have to look at a Facebook ad proposing to stand up for my right to speak. The irony abounds.
Get rid of fake opposition conservatives. They are merely useful idiots for their enemies. Read Murray Rothbard, then wake up, then get back to me after that.
@@conceptualclarity ha, maybe so :) .... that "conservative" commentator who was so enamored with the crease in Obama's trousers was a favorite example/talking-point/go-to of Rush :)
"Why on earth would we fight against the barbarians and for the civilized West through becoming barbarians." But this is exactly what Buckley asked us to do in order to oppose communism. "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." - William F. Buckley (regarding the "invincible aggressiveness of the Soviet Union")
@@ronlanter6906 Yeah, Buckley said this in an article entitled "The Party and the Deep Blue Sea." He basically said that ideally, the Republican Party should be anti-state, but practically, we should accept a totalitarianism. I can't imagine a more duplicitous statement in the history of political thought. But it makes perfect sense if you see Buckley as a CIA agent tasked with subverting the anti-state, anti-war, and pro-market American Right into a mirrored opposite of Leftwing totalitarianism.
I have never encountered anyone with whom I would more like to associate and commiserate and talk as a mere matter of respite from this world... How is it that this old grump is my brother from another mother? I finished the Lucidity of Lewis statement before you did Sir and still laughed harder than I ever do when forcing laughter among people who do not get me. Belly bellowing laughs.
Could the following quotation from G.K. Chesterton provide an insight as to what Pastor Wilson finds lacking in National Review to cause his subscription cancellation? "Joy, which was the small publicity of the pagan, is the gigantic secret of the Christian. And as I close this chaotic volume I open again the strange small book from which all Christianity came; and I am again haunted by a kind of confirmation. The tremendous figure which fills the Gospels towers in this respect, as in every other, above all the thinkers who ever thought themselves tall. His pathos was natural, almost casual. The Stoics, ancient and modern, were proud of concealing their tears. He never concealed His tears; He showed them plainly on His open face at any daily sight, such as the far sight of His native city. Yet He concealed something. Solemn supermen and imperial diplomatists are proud of restraining their anger. He never restrained His anger. He flung furniture down the front steps of the Temple, and asked men how they expected to escape the damnation of Hell. Yet He restrained something. I say it with reverence; there was in that shattering personality a thread that must be called shyness. There was something that He hid from all men when He went up a mountain to pray. There was something that He covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied that it was His mirth." (Orthodoxy, pages 157-58) www.agape-biblia.org/orthodoxy/GKChesterton-Orthodoxy.pdf
But that's mistaken and I think it's the Matthew movie that shows Jesus portrayed cheerfully. Just because it doesn't say "and then he laughed," it doesn't mean he didn't. Numerous times he says things that must be understood to be cheeky, and we would have to imagine that he had a grin on his face while he did it
Rush Limbaugh fought that way it seems... and William Buckley was a big hero of his. Listening to you, pastor Wilson, it makes me wonder if Rush learned his "fighting style" from William F. Buckley and the NR as well.... as a rube and cornpone at cracker barrel, I really miss Rush Limbaugh.... although for the last few years I only listened to him about an hour or two a week on average; just enough to get his take on the top news/events.
Rush really was in awe of WB. He told the story of when he was young and was scared to even call NR about a subscription, thinking that was probably something for those of the rarified air only. And of the first time he met him after being invited to a dinner at his home and being so scared he had to drive around the block after first arriving, just to get up the nerve to ring the doorbell. I was a listener for 30 years; I sure miss him.
The important thing is to be as small and as ideologically pure as possible. And to feel really, really proud about it. This is the future of politics.
In support of Doug's point, NR and the Federalist are so sidelined that I honestly can't tell you which one is which. Is it the Federalist that has David French? *shrug
What's the problem with the Federalist? I had heard it was much better than NR. David French is at some lesser known Vichy "conservative" website founded by Steve Hayes, the Dispatch, I think. Sort of a successor to Weekly Standard.
I loved Buckley. I love you. Thank you. When you were at the back of Tabletalk, I read it back to front. I am a member of Canon+, but got in the habit of listening to these here.
There will be no shortage of potato salads as the food shortages manifest. They all hold office and aren't leaving. The old potatoes will be replaced with new potatoes you see.
I am guessing that Buckley wouldn't have cared for Trump but would have loved a lot of what he did and fought for. National Review has pretty much lost the plot though, there are good reasons to at this point go "yeah, I don't want them any more". They're not so much conservative as kneejerk elitist and chamber of commerce. Their concern isn't constitution and small government federalism, but instead using those terms and excuses to support their newer conclusions about life. They keep making the worst calls on events, then have to backpedal.
This all happened to me, in much the same manner, from the discovery of Buckley, watching Firing Line, to the books, to his sailing adventures, on and on. He was the essence of what I perceived "Conservatism" to be, Catholic and all. Plus, Rush loved him. I left much earlier than you, and while I followed the latter acolytes with glee for a time (Goldberg, etc.) when they became an almost monolith of Anti T-man sentiment, I could no longer hang. Things change. Despite the racial kerfuffle, I remain a big fan of John Derbyshire. We will not see the likes of WFB, Jr. again.
Wonderful! Another Buckley fan! Years (decades) ago I read his book called “Windfall”, I believe. I have absolutely no interest in sailing, but Buckley could write about pretty much anything, and I would be glad to read it. One of my favorites is “A Torch Kept Lit”. And sadly true about NR.
I don't for one moment believe Buckley would have been a Never-Trumper past the 2016 GOP primaries. I am wondering how Rich Lowry could sink so low that he would let Victor David Hanson, probably his most popluar columnist, feel unwelcome enough to leave, while hanging on to the reprehensible Kevin Wiliamson.
Doug, You are truly a modern “reformed” Chesterton. In 50 years NR will realize they somehow missed your genius reflections. God bless the keen insights He has given you.
honest question: @9:44 - how is this different than the illustration, "would you lie to the nazis to conceal jews?" or, said another way, "why is lying sometimes ok?"
8:26-- for the following 30 seconds or so... "I do not say this because I am challenging whatever conspiracy theory they appear to be advancing" That comment is almost sure, in its context, to be seen by some anti-small-hatters as a validation. I am not saying this as a criticism - you shouldn't have to caveat every thing you say. I'm just pointing out what's likely to happen so that we won't be surprised by the comments and can address them effectively when they show up to troll/recruit.
![BabyChiefDoit - Too Slow (feat. STAR BANDZ) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zayaxws7RPg/mqdefault.jpg)
Inspiring!
I live in the republic of Ireland where evangelicals are about as common as real leprechauns. The country is post-Catholic (since major scandals were made public) and the loud voices in media are anti-Catholic leftists.
Christians feel small, fragile, and haven’t seen many people convert to Christianity since the charismatic revival in the 70s-80s.
With huge social changes recently like legalising same-sex marriage, repealing protections for the unborn, Christians feel like the bad guys, trying to cling on to a dark past that we weren’t really part of in the first place.
But it’s this lack of humour and joy you’re talking about that’s hitting me! I’m exhausted from social interactions. I’m always trying to be winsome about unpopular opinions and carefully trying to help unpick someone’s anti-Christian worldview.
I’m genuinely exhausted and feel I’m missing some of this humour and cheekiness that Irish people are actually known for!
There are so few people I feel relaxed around enough to be like this with. If you read this please pray for God’s help with my interactions, and that he’d help me feel freer in conversations.
I hear you brother. Just prayed for you. "For the joy set before Him endured the cross." Not sure how that applies but it came to mind as I was reading your post.
@@wesleymarkmusic403 Appreciate this brother! The Lord’s joy certainly lifts my heart.
Well, roman catholicism is heresy. So what do you expect for your country to become?
@@cryptic8043 I don’t disagree with you. We’ve moved from a false gospel into secularism and paganism in the span of about 30 years.
Do you think that the Ulster protestants have by and large remained more faithful? There's a stereotype here in England that orangemen are still 'Bible-thumping bigots'!
NR has sucked for years
You should have parted ways in 1993 when Buckley fired Sobran.
Well said... I subscribed to NH since 1981 and left 10 years ago. Like the Republican party, they left me, I didn't leave them!
"...a public intellectual among the rubes and cornpones holding forth in my corner booth at Cracker Barrel" .... hahaha hilarious! I'd like to be right there!
@Jennifer Mugrage I do too when the food is hot... but I don't think he was "dissing" Cracker Barrel... I think he was just accepting the stereotype and/or taking the posture of looking at it ironically/sarcastically through the eyes of the "elites"
Buckley redirected conservative energy into a dead end. He did so with style. I guess that is admirable?
It took the MahaRushie to get that energy back.
Well said.
I was attracted to NR for the exact same reason, but my reason for leaving was much different. Buckley was a gatekeeper, and I too late realized that "standing athwart history yelling 'stop'" was exactly the ineffectual equivalent of standing on a train track and doing the same. Here we are now, and I think Buckley would be pleased.
You got it! Read William F Buckley: Pied Piper of the Establishment
Buckley, by commandeering the post-war anti-war, pro market, limited-government right wing, helped to bring about the modern state of centralized bureaucracy we live under in America. His excuse was that we needed this bureaucracy in order to fight communism abroad, but of course it has not been repealed one iota since the collapse of the Soviet Union. He would have done well to take to heart Tolkien's wisdom found in his great epic Lord of the Rings: you can't use the ring to defeat the forces of evil, without yourself becoming its mirrored opposite.
Bingo, fake opposition Buckley. The best support you can create is a false opposition to secretly advance your cause.
I grew up watching Buckley every weekend, popcorn in hand dazzled by his spectacular vernacular. Imagine my disappointment when I discover, he was a CIA mouthpiece, performing a dialectical act.
Exactly “dazzled by his spectacular vernacular”. This was the problem. He wowed people while he proceeded to divide conservatives in typical CIA fashion.
This is news to me. When did this become public?
I can't find any info on this so I'm assuming it is just a theory.
Controlled opposition, create a false option to your power grab. Your opponents will join this fake opposition, without realizing that it is factory designed to advance the very thing that they are trying to stop.
Do conservatives ever catch on? Nope, useful idiots for their enemies, as always.
"... the kind of urbane sophisticates who would know what fork to use when dining with the queen."
This is, actually, a big part of the problem with National Review, in my opinion.
National Review went from being so conservative they were against the civil rights legislation of LBJ, to promoting atheist Jews (Jonah Goldberg), gay proponents (Jason Lee Steorts), and elitists whose hatred of their roots in flyover country is without end (Kevin Williamson). These men were promoted because they were good writers, but are they good men? The entire organization was subverted, and most of the subversion happened before WFB's death, which makes me question the project from the beginning. I mean, what kind of rallying cry is 'standing athwart history, yelling stop'? I always knew what National Review was against, but what they were for was far from clear. And as far as stridency is concerned, the time for observing Marquess of Queensbury rules is over. We are facing overt anti-Christian (and anti-whyte) bigotry and repression is this country. We need fighters, for there is no substitute for victory.
@C Parker
WFB was CIA. That is not good.
Amen
We all know that’s the case. But what is the solution. There are millions of people pointing to what’s wrong, but not one willing to lead the charge and say, “follow me.”
Exactly. People marvel at good writing but can’t recognize truth. And can’t see that most of the good writing is trash when it comes to being good.
@@christophercunningham5434 The only real solutions are the tough ones. On the cultural level, we must reform ourselves and get back to our, if not Catholic, at least Christian roots. On the political level, secession is the only answer which does not involve bloodshed. We're not gong to convince the tens of millions of people in California and New York to reject the sinful habits they've acquired. Those ruts are too deep. Individual conversions will of course occur, but those communities won't be changed for the good until they face a disaster of their own making.
National Review and these types destroyed the conservative party. Whatever happened to strong conservatives like Pat Buchanan
Pat had his own issues. For one, he was anti-Semitic. However, there was a lot I liked about him.
@@bobhawkins2997 So Pat was a sinner like you and not perfect. But at least he was a man unlike that preening Buckley. How was Pat an anti-Semite?
In many ways Pay Buchanan is closer to orthodox Christianity, than most protestant's and Catholics today.
Protestant's and Catholics think like classical Greek humanist. Nothing CHristian about them or the way they think about money or anything else.
@@bobhawkins2997 and you mean that he wasn't a blind supporter of the secular Marxist state of Israel. Because naturally, the job of every American citizen is to destroy their country, wreck the reconomy, and lose their freedoms, to get involved in countless Wars to serve a bunch of atheist Marxist socialist that live in the state of Israel. Am I right? Anybody who thinks that the state of Israel cares one rip about the US, the Constitution, Christianity, or American freedoms, they need to have their head examined. But if you don't blindly support every single thing that regime does, you are magically anti-Semitic. Does it take brains? Nope. Does it make sense? Nope. But it certainly shuts people up and gets them to comply.
I started reading NR in my first year of law school in 1983. I, too, have stopped reading for the same reason you mention. I would have enjoyed watching Buckley comment on Trump.
I laughed all the way through this one, especially at the harrumphing. I used to devour NR when my dad got it during the 90s. I thought it was fascinating and funny. I tried to get my own subscription in 2016 and found issue after issue heavy, dull, irrelevant and just...no longer itself. I haven’t read it since 2017.
Wow, this hit home. I just returned from a National Review seminar and boy was it underwhelming. I thought it would be different. It was supposed to be fun and insightful with a touch of irreverent humor and of course cocktails. It was Wonder Bread. I didn't even stay for the cocktail reception. I'm still subscribed to NR currently, but the thought of letting my membership lapse has crossed my mind a couple of times in the last two years. When I read Buckley or watch the Firing Line, I feel the ebullience and Joie de Vivre that Douglas alludes to. Now when I read NR, I have to look at a Facebook ad proposing to stand up for my right to speak. The irony abounds.
Get rid of fake opposition conservatives. They are merely useful idiots for their enemies. Read Murray Rothbard, then wake up, then get back to me after that.
Pastor Doug, you mean you no longer enjoy Jonah Goldbergs shrill, Christless, elitist tedium? I can't imagine!
was it he who was so impressed by the crease in Barak Obama's pants?
@@scatoutdebutter I would not be surprised in least if it were.
@@scatoutdebutter Aren't you thinking about that drone David Brooks?
@@conceptualclarity ha, maybe so :) .... that "conservative" commentator who was so enamored with the crease in Obama's trousers was a favorite example/talking-point/go-to of Rush :)
"Why on earth would we fight against the barbarians and for the civilized West through becoming barbarians."
But this is exactly what Buckley asked us to do in order to oppose communism.
"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." - William F. Buckley (regarding the "invincible aggressiveness of the Soviet Union")
Wow 😲
@@ronlanter6906 Yeah, Buckley said this in an article entitled "The Party and the Deep Blue Sea." He basically said that ideally, the Republican Party should be anti-state, but practically, we should accept a totalitarianism. I can't imagine a more duplicitous statement in the history of political thought. But it makes perfect sense if you see Buckley as a CIA agent tasked with subverting the anti-state, anti-war, and pro-market American Right into a mirrored opposite of Leftwing totalitarianism.
So very well said!
I have never encountered anyone with whom I would more like to associate and commiserate and talk as a mere matter of respite from this world... How is it that this old grump is my brother from another mother? I finished the Lucidity of Lewis statement before you did Sir and still laughed harder than I ever do when forcing laughter among people who do not get me. Belly bellowing laughs.
You should see about getting Michael Malice on for a discussion of Buckley and National Review
Could the following quotation from G.K. Chesterton provide an insight as to what Pastor Wilson finds lacking in National Review to cause his subscription cancellation?
"Joy, which was the small publicity of the pagan, is the gigantic secret of
the Christian. And as I close this chaotic volume I open again the strange
small book from which all Christianity came; and I am again haunted by a
kind of confirmation. The tremendous figure which fills the Gospels
towers in this respect, as in every other, above all the thinkers who ever
thought themselves tall. His pathos was natural, almost casual. The Stoics,
ancient and modern, were proud of concealing their tears. He never
concealed His tears; He showed them plainly on His open face at any daily
sight, such as the far sight of His native city. Yet He concealed something.
Solemn supermen and imperial diplomatists are proud of restraining their
anger. He never restrained His anger. He flung furniture down the front
steps of the Temple, and asked men how they expected to escape the
damnation of Hell. Yet He restrained something.
I say it with reverence; there was in that shattering personality a thread
that must be called shyness. There was something that He hid from all men
when He went up a mountain to pray. There was something that He
covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was
some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked
upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied that it was His mirth."
(Orthodoxy, pages 157-58)
www.agape-biblia.org/orthodoxy/GKChesterton-Orthodoxy.pdf
But that's mistaken and I think it's the Matthew movie that shows Jesus portrayed cheerfully. Just because it doesn't say "and then he laughed," it doesn't mean he didn't. Numerous times he says things that must be understood to be cheeky, and we would have to imagine that he had a grin on his face while he did it
Rush Limbaugh fought that way it seems... and William Buckley was a big hero of his. Listening to you, pastor Wilson, it makes me wonder if Rush learned his "fighting style" from William F. Buckley and the NR as well.... as a rube and cornpone at cracker barrel, I really miss Rush Limbaugh.... although for the last few years I only listened to him about an hour or two a week on average; just enough to get his take on the top news/events.
Rush really was in awe of WB. He told the story of when he was young and was scared to even call NR about a subscription, thinking that was probably something for those of the rarified air only. And of the first time he met him after being invited to a dinner at his home and being so scared he had to drive around the block after first arriving, just to get up the nerve to ring the doorbell.
I was a listener for 30 years; I sure miss him.
@@dw8773 I remember him telling that story :)
Was ummm… this whole video really about how Uncle Doug is unsubbing to a publication? 😂😂😂
Were you expecting an additional focus for this video?
"Now NR just harumphs along ..." That about sums it up.
Ohhhh Doug, there are no booths at Cracker Barrel 😂
Never heard of it before
"Grumpy Trumpy" LOL. Hadn't heard of NR until now. I guess I should get better read.
Y’all should have Joel Salatin on Man Rampant.
like Sam Francis said (paraphrasing) ....they ended up riding in the caboose of the train they were supposed to stop.
The important thing is to be as small and as ideologically pure as possible. And to feel really, really proud about it. This is the future of politics.
In support of Doug's point, NR and the Federalist are so sidelined that I honestly can't tell you which one is which. Is it the Federalist that has David French? *shrug
What's the problem with the Federalist? I had heard it was much better than NR.
David French is at some lesser known Vichy "conservative" website founded by Steve Hayes, the Dispatch, I think. Sort of a successor to Weekly Standard.
Very well stated. Thank you, Uncle Doug!
Mr. Wilson said, "so to speak." Now I'm left wondering if he has read or listened to Hoppe.
I loved Buckley. I love you. Thank you. When you were at the back of Tabletalk, I read it back to front. I am a member of Canon+, but got in the habit of listening to these here.
What do you think of Steven crowder? I enjoy his sharp and funny ways of discussing the daiky news
Wasn’t William F Buckley kinda cringe though
There will be no shortage of potato salads as the food shortages manifest. They all hold office and aren't leaving. The old potatoes will be replaced with new potatoes you see.
Dang now I want Cracker Barrel
I am guessing that Buckley wouldn't have cared for Trump but would have loved a lot of what he did and fought for.
National Review has pretty much lost the plot though, there are good reasons to at this point go "yeah, I don't want them any more". They're not so much conservative as kneejerk elitist and chamber of commerce. Their concern isn't constitution and small government federalism, but instead using those terms and excuses to support their newer conclusions about life. They keep making the worst calls on events, then have to backpedal.
"bookstore in Ann Arbor"
Was it the Dawn Treader used book shop?
Here, here sir. Well said.
Doug, I recently discovered this blog and I became a fast fan. I love your prose. What’s the best way to become a better writer? Thanks.
This all happened to me, in much the same manner, from the discovery of Buckley, watching Firing Line, to the books, to his sailing adventures, on and on. He was the essence of what I perceived "Conservatism" to be, Catholic and all. Plus, Rush loved him. I left much earlier than you, and while I followed the latter acolytes with glee for a time (Goldberg, etc.) when they became an almost monolith of Anti T-man sentiment, I could no longer hang. Things change. Despite the racial kerfuffle, I remain a big fan of John Derbyshire. We will not see the likes of WFB, Jr. again.
Brilliant as always Pastor Wilson!
Wonderful! Another Buckley fan! Years (decades) ago I read his book called “Windfall”, I believe. I have absolutely no interest in sailing, but Buckley could write about pretty much anything, and I would be glad to read it. One of my favorites is “A Torch Kept Lit”.
And sadly true about NR.
I don't for one moment believe Buckley would have been a Never-Trumper past the 2016 GOP primaries. I am wondering how Rich Lowry could sink so low that he would let Victor David Hanson, probably his most popluar columnist, feel unwelcome enough to leave, while hanging on to the reprehensible Kevin Wiliamson.
I let my NR sub go awhile after Buckley passed. Analysis of politics and religion is dull without wit.
Maybe the Daily Wire is the National Review of my generation
Why doesn't Doug Wilson hire a capable producer? The quality of these posts is underwhelming.
Why don't you volunteer, since it seems to bother you so much?
read Chronicles Magazine instead.
Try the daily stormer
My. Does anyone actually care what magazines you subscribe to? They need to get a life.
.
Doug, You are truly a modern “reformed” Chesterton. In 50 years NR will realize they somehow missed your genius reflections. God bless the keen insights He has given you.
First
Lol you just now stopped reading National Review? Boomer moment.
Boomers have a really really hard time parting with things like this
THIS IS MAGA COUNTRY!!! 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲
America voted trump out.
@@DM-dk7js after the voter rolls were inflated and hundreds of thousands of ballots cast in those names...yep, “America” sure did. 😇
@@DM-dk7js rigged out 😒 😤
@@timnoe19 false. Zero evidence of fraud. Facts over feelings.
@@DM-dk7js MAGA 2024 LANDSLIDE!!! 💪💪💪
Race matters
honest question: @9:44 - how is this different than the illustration, "would you lie to the nazis to conceal jews?"
or, said another way, "why is lying sometimes ok?"
Buckley would have been a great memer because he was. The one guy on the "right" that communicates like Buckley did is Michael Malice.
The homosexual anarchist?
Malice would despise you for comparing him to Buckley.
What can you expect from a Roman Catholic? If the root is corrupt, what can you expect for fruit?
Fellow viewers,
Would anyone else prefer that the barking sound be removed from the intro?
No, that's what makes it.
8:26-- for the following 30 seconds or so... "I do not say this because I am challenging whatever conspiracy theory they appear to be advancing" That comment is almost sure, in its context, to be seen by some anti-small-hatters as a validation. I am not saying this as a criticism - you shouldn't have to caveat every thing you say. I'm just pointing out what's likely to happen so that we won't be surprised by the comments and can address them effectively when they show up to troll/recruit.
I'm here to troll/recruit!
Imagine not being anti-smallhat in 2016+6
@@jacobmark4198 hey man, thanks for outing yourself so others can avoid being deceived by you more effectively
@@horrificpleasantry9474 lol you're the one who is outing himself. Hasbara troll
Burger 🍔 King 🤴 and Doug.