# William F. Buckley Jr concedes defeat **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 28, 2006, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454 "2006-02-28T14:39:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/1 "2006-02-28T14:39:48Z")
William F. Buckley Jr is the founder of The National Review and one of the most influential conservative thinkers in the US. In an opinion piece published yesterday under the headline [“It Didn’t Work”](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucwb/20060228/cm_ucwb/itdidntwork) , he wrote > [@](#): > > Mr. Bush has a very difficult internal problem here because to make the kind of concession that is strategically appropriate requires a mitigation of policies he has several times affirmed in high-flown pronouncements. His challenge is to persuade himself that he can submit to a historical reality without forswearing basic commitments in foreign policy. > > He will certainly face the current development as military leaders are expected to do: They are called upon to acknowledge a tactical setback, but to insist on the survival of strategic policies. > > Yes, but within their own counsels, different plans have to be made. And the kernel here is the acknowledgment of defeat. I voted for GWB twice and have at times defended the US invasion of Iraq. For a while, I have been concerned that the goal of a stable, democratic Iraq was unattainable via US involvement. Given the large number of Americans who have been against the Iraq war from the beginning, and the increasing number of people who have shifted to that view based on subsequent revelations and events, I wonder what impact Buckley’s new assessment will have on conservative opinion, and on the White House, where Buckely is certainly read and respected. Does this article signal, or will it help to initiate, the beginning of a change in US plans in Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/2 "2006-02-28T14:44:49Z")
None. Intellectualism has been repudiated by the White House over & over again. Buckely was _tolerated_, not _embraced_, because he was “on board”. Now that he is **not** “on board”–i.e. now that he disagrees with the Administration-- he will be taboo. I anticipate a public villification of Mr. Buckley. ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/3 "2006-02-28T14:54:39Z")
[QUOTE=Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor] None. Intellectualism has been repudiated by the White House over & over again. Buckely was _tolerated_, not _embraced_, because he was “on board”. Now that he is **not** “on board”–i.e. now that he disagrees with the Administration-- he will be taboo. I anticipate a public villification of Mr. Buckley. [/QUOTE] Buckley and other writers in his magazine have disagreed with the Bush administration on various issues since GWB took office, so this isn’t an initial act of apostasy. It is a statement of a new appraisal of a very important issue by someone who has never been “on board” in the sense that I think you mean. Buckley is highly regarded in conservative circles and is not easily ignored by Republican politicians. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/4 "2006-02-28T15:08:18Z")
> [@Bosda](#): > > I anticipate a public villification of Mr. Buckley. I tend to doubt it. For one thing, Buckley’s article was careful not to accuse the Administration of actually, y’know, doing anything wrong or stupid. All the blame goes to circumstance and situation. What “failed” was not the Administration’s actual conduct of the war, but its “objective” and its “postulates”: > [@WF Buckley](#): > > One can’t doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed. […] Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human reserves that call for civil life haven’t proved strong enough. […] It is healthier for the disillusioned American to concede that in one theater in the Mideast, the postulates didn’t work. Also, I think that many conservatives are aware that liberals are expecting them to tar and feather Buckley (especially given the [hysterically vituperative conservative reaction](http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/02/prepare-noose-for-bill-buckley.html) when Howard Dean less than three months ago said essentially what Buckley’s saying now—including suggestions that Dean ought to be prosecuted for sedition (Ben Shapiro) or hung for treason (Michael Reagan)). Conservative commentators, IMO, will put up with being called hypocrites over the Dean-and-Buckley affair rather than give liberals the satisfaction of seeing them turn on the “Grand Old Man of Conservatism” with vilification and accusations of treason. The responses to Buckley so far seem to have been pretty moderate: > [@](#): > > [Ed Morrissey](http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006405.php): > Today’s opinion piece by William F. Buckley, the father of American conservatism, highlights the difference between traditional conservatives and the Bush Administration’s efforts in foreign policy, along with a host of other arenas. […] > > One hesitates to get into an argument with the icon of conservative philosophy, but in this case, Buckley isn’t reversing course; he’s expounding an argument that conservatives (paleoconservatives, if you will) have always made in terms of foreign engagement. His argument appears sound on a superficial level because it only addresses the actions of the moment. > [@](#): > > [Gina Cobb](http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2006/02/buckley_says_us.html): > Buckley is being extremely quick to declare defeat in Iraq after sectarian violence arising from the bombing of the Shiite mosque. […] > > Buckley’s claim that America has failed in Iraq is too much based on dramatic events of this past week that have yet to fully unfold. I have to conclude that Buckley has fallen prey to defeatism. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/5 "2006-02-28T15:09:37Z")
Buckley commands a decent amount of respect from Fiscal conservatives, Baseball fans and a grudging respect from Moderate Republicans. If this article is followed up on with other articles and interviews, then it might affect public policy. If he makes a few rounds, appearances on The Daily Show, The Don Imus Show, Hardball, it could snowball into something. If it is just an article read by his regulars, I do not think the impact will be the same. This is not on par with Cronkite questioning the Vietnam War. I do not think anyone has the general respect and appeal in 2006 that Cronkite had in 1970. Jim _{just my opinion of course}_ ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/6 "2006-02-28T15:25:02Z")
[QUOTE=What Exit?] Buckley commands a decent amount of respect from Fiscal conservatives, Baseball fans and a grudging respect from Moderate Republicans. [/QUOTE] Baseball fans? You sure you’re not thinking of George Will? ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/7 "2006-02-28T15:27:41Z")
**Kimstu** , thanks for the links. Buckley fallen prey to defeatism? Gina Cobb must be unfamiliar with his writing over the years. Nor do I think her claim that this change is simply a reaction to the mosque bombing is true. **What Exit** - Jim, you may be confusing Buckley with George Will, who is a noted baseball fan. And I wouldn’t expect WFB to hit the talking head circuit. I think he has retired from television. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2006, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/8 "2006-02-28T15:43:13Z")
[QUOTE=Crotalus] …snip… **What Exit** - Jim, you may be confusing Buckley with George Will, who is a noted baseball fan. And I wouldn’t expect WFB to hit the talking head circuit. I think he has retired from television. [/QUOTE] You are of course right. I guess I need a scorecard to help me keep track of Conservative writers. :smack: **Neurotik** : good catch thank you for the correction. I still stand by the idea that this won’t have a large impact barring an unexpected boost for the media. Jim ---
**Author:** ![Bomzaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e480ec/32.png) [@Bomzaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bomzaway)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/9 "2006-03-01T00:00:30Z")
[QUOTE=Crotalus] And I wouldn’t expect WFB to hit the talking head circuit. I think he has retired from television. [/QUOTE] That’s what I was thinking. He stays off camera for the most part nowadays doesn’t he? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2006, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/william-f-buckley-jr-concedes-defeat/346454/10 "2006-03-01T00:09:51Z")
Buckley ain’t what he used to be, but he’s still the epitome of intellectual conservatism. Even old lefties like me concede the guy is brilliant. When you start losing people like him, you have to wonder who else will fall out of line. Traditional conservatives may at long last have had enough of the neocons and will start to fight to take their party back. If so, perhaps that will be the only positive result of Bush’s madness.