5 Firing Line moments that are still relevant today | William F. Buckley | American Masters | PBS

Official website: www.pbs.org/ame... | #AmericanMastersPBS
William F. Buckley, Jr. hosted Firing Line for 33 years. During his tenure as host, he debated a number of influential public figures on topics ranging from comedy to imperialism. This compliation shows Buckley in conversation with five of his most memorable guests on matters that are still important today.
Discover the intellectual evolution and political legacy of William F. Buckley, Jr. See how the author and commentator, one of the foremost public intellectuals in American history, galvanized the modern conservative movement.
Chapters:
00:05 - Groucho Marx and Buckley on what kind of jokes are culturally appropriate
02:21 - Allen Ginsberg on drugs, spirituality and art
05:11 - Norman Mailer on the differences between Republicans and Democrats
08:47 - Noah Chomsky and Buckley on American imperialism
12:21 - Huey P. Newton defends the rhetoric of the Black Panther Party
Subscribe to the American Masters channel for more clips: bit.ly/1JmUCu5
Enjoy full episodes of your favorite American Masters films: www.pbs.org/ame...
FOLLOW AMERICAN MASTERS:
Facebook: / americanmasters
X: / pbsamermasters
Instagram: / pbsamericanmasters
TikTok: / pbsamericanmasters
FOLLOW PBS:
Facebook: / pbs
X: / pbs
Instagram: / pbs
TikTok: / pbs
Shop: www.shop.pbs.org/
___________________________________
Now in its 38th season on PBS, American Masters illuminates the lives and creative journeys of those who have left an indelible impression on our cultural landscape-through compelling, unvarnished stories. Setting the standard for documentary film profiles, the series has earned widespread critical acclaim: 28 Emmy Awards-including 10 for Outstanding Non-Fiction Series and five for Outstanding Non-Fiction Special-two News & Documentary Emmys, 14 Peabodys, three Grammys, two Producers Guild Awards, an Oscar, and many other honors. To further explore the lives and works of more than 250 masters past and present, the American Masters website offers full episodes, film outtakes, filmmaker interviews, the podcast “American Masters: Creative Spark,” educational resources, digital original series and more. The series is a production of The WNET Group.

[@ShermerHighSchool]

Too bad we don't have a show like this anymore. The world is a poorer place without it.

[@wwbuirkle]

PBS would never give him a show today

[@geneobrien8907]

@@wwbuirkle There's no need for PBS to give someone like Buckley a show on PBS, there are entire networks centered around right wing politics.

[@wwbuirkle]

@@geneobrien8907 PBS is tax payer TV so yea a little diversity might help,or they should be defunded

[@alanrogs3990]

@@geneobrien8907 Of course there is a need. PBS is Public. There should be 'diversity'. BTW, do you also feel there are entire networks centered around leftist politics?

[@geneobrien8907]

@@alanrogs3990 It depends on what you consider leftist politics to be. For a lot of people their hatred for the left is their raison d'être, truth be damned. There's only one "news" network that's been sued for nearly $1b because of its lies. Lies, misinformation and disinformation are not "diversity". In comparison, you'll find more fact based news on networks which are not exclusively right wing.

[@boogerie]

"I'm proud of being a Jew particularly week before last." I believe that's a reference to Israel's victory in the Six Day War

[@The_Accuser]

That might be! No Groucho without a puff on the cigar. 🥸

[@JamesCormier]

Perfect civility and intellectually grounded. We need this type of discourse today.

[@squareinsquare2078]

There are plenty of debates online that are much longer than Firing Line, with perfect civility and intellectual grounding. Much more than back in the day.

[@Arareemote]

​@squareinsquare2078 According to Buckley himself, the Firing Line show was never meant to be an interview or a debate program. Its purpose was to facilitate an exchange of ideas, and the goal was not to win or lose, but for the guest to demonstrate their superior knowledge of the subject to the audience. If the audience had ever come away from a program thinking Buckley knew better then the guest didn't do a good job lmao. Both during the shows run and after he objected to any claim the programs premise or focus was debate. [The program did host a few formal debates, but these were special programs, and so they shouldn't be confused with the regular episodes.]

[@Mike1614b]

the left has moved so far left, that is why

[@billmason2785]

Buckley yes conservative. ...had entertained all points in of the political spectrum. ...giving a great back and forth

[@billmason2785]

@@The_Accuser it's a good agenda

[@LaArtsGuy]

To all of you, who don’t understand the great elegance of people displaying their desperate ideas… The whole point of the constitution is to preserve that conversation so we can solve problems together. Whether you like or dislike, either person in a discussion is truly irrelevant. What’s important is to understand both sides of an idea in the same moment.

[@katherinea.rodgers8366]

I miss William F. Buckley!! I never missed Foring Line!!

[@clete3977]

Foring Line. Never saw that. I'll google it.

[@Robin-399]

@@clete3977 it’s quite good, it’s like the Firing Line, but everyone has a strong New York accent

[@WalterBurton]

It's always fascinated me, Mailer's evident nervousness and rhetorical inferiority in this specific moment.

[@egorkotkin]

Interesting how 50 years ago you could constantly hear the word “dialectical”, like this clips show, on air, but you never hear it on American TV today.

[@kdmdlo]

Could you possibly imagine a civil, intellectually-grounded discourse today? To begin, the participants in our political discussions today simply don't know anything (could you possibly imagine Matt Gaetz reading Karl Marx???). Add to it the calm, measured, polite exchange of ideas and it simply becomes an impossibility today. We are just so much worse off because of those (e.g., Newt Gingrich) that worked so hard to advance/propagate the cracks and fissures in our politics.

[@wwbuirkle]

No but I could beleve AOC or Omar. LMFAO

[@kdmdlo]

@@wwbuirkle Well, I don't know Ms. Omar particularly well, but yes ... I could absolutely see Ms. Ocasio-Cortez having such a discussion. She's reasonable, rational and uses ... you know ... facts. Matt Gaetz is too busy trolling high schools and Ms. Green has just one intonation (and that's full-on "shrill").

[@wwbuirkle]

@@kdmdlo AOC using facts? I'm in her district genius nothing factual or worthwhile comes out of her mouth

[@kdmdlo]

@@wwbuirkle Well, to hear the facts, you would actually have to listen to her and, perhaps, engage with her. She's your congressperson, speak with her. You'll be surprised to see that she's actually willing to talk to you if you're prepared to be civil.

[@wwbuirkle]

@@kdmdlo LMFAO I guess you're just a fellow Socialist which is kinda embarrassing

[@davidparnell1893]

Buckley did face the hard truths and questions more logically than ANY "politician" of today. He could be inflexible but not without a logically reasoned and expressed position. He would be so disappointed with the simpleton idiocy of politicians today no matter which "party" they claimed.

[@jimsinger2521]

Buckley was a legend; he could expound and debate on anything.

[@lisaharris452]

He certainly did, but I disagree that he could. He didn't have the adequate humility to even notice when people made points he should have pondered before rejecting. A mid-wit with a vocabulary and style that other mid-wits think is very, very smart.

[@jimsinger2521]

@@lisaharris452 Sure. Not left wing enough for you? Watch him debate the guy who believed in race eugenics (who was a scientist who invented some kind of radio transmitter) or the leader of apartheid South Africa. He never interrupted, debated the creme de la creme intellectuals of the day with ease (on all topics) and was completely brilliant. Watch his final interview with Charlie Rose, if you want advice from a mid wit.

[@lisaharris452]

@@jimsinger2521 It's more a matter of intelligence. I don't mistake verbal jousting for being smart or informed. A lot of rightwingers, most of whom are anti-intellectual, fall for anyone who puts people down and has a normal vocabulary, which many of them lack and are self-conscious about. They swooned for George Will, too, but now would probably condemn him as a communist.

[@jimsinger2521]

@@lisaharris452 anyone who associates George Will with communism has clearly bought into the Trump idiocy. If you think Buckley would have tolerated Trump, you’re not paying attention.

[@drm9979]

@@lisaharris452 I can only believe you must not be bright enough to see it. the exact opposite is true. it is fascinating how he engages at the essence of what other intellectuals are saying, spontaneously and with ease. Many liberals in the 50s, 60s, 70s and even 80s admired WFB and were even a bit in awe of him. either you or they can be called “midwits”, not both.

[@kevinhealey6540]

Buckley ran for Mayor of NYC in 65. He was asked by a reporter what would be his first official act as Mayor, should he win. Press "Read more" for his answer. - - "Demand a recount."

[@roughhabit9085]

The editor of the NY Times said he had to keep sending different reporters to his press conferences because they all came back saying they would vote for him.

[@user-ev4rp3qb6x]

That answer alone would make me vote for him. Self education makes for a better person and an open mind

[@kurtgubitz]

That’s not Allan Ginsberg! That’s David Cross.

[@loupasternak]

Thought it was Jack Black

[@CamberGreber]

Came here to post this 😂

[@t.c.eisele5262]

What, no Gore Vidal? 😂

[@riff2072]

Could not have Norman Mailer and Gore Vidal in the same post. All that would do is start a fight in the comments.

[@richardpatrick2852]

He was more than Mr. Buckley could tolerate. I don't blame him.

[@roughhabit9085]

Um that’s because Vidal was never on Firing Line.

[@Taskforceandy]

Yeah he got a bit antisemitic after that bad review he got for Lincoln

[@charlespirate1]

This would be much better if the participants spoke much more quickly and in sound bites for short periods interspersed with intrusive graphics and music.

[@IanBerg]

Are you Rupert Mirdoch’s burner account? 😂

[@jasondulin7376]

Finally someone said it.

[@Parthenon88]

😂

[@Robin-399]

It would be much better if Buckley just asked them to talk about the topics in their latest book and said how great their book is so they sell more books and come back on his podcast

[@robertaccorsini4663]

What did Huey Newton say?

[@riff2072]

People, white, black, whatever, have more income than we do difference. To find out those common things we need dialog. But the dialog turns into race-based rhetoric which can causes hatred and violence. We need to remove the rhetoric and replace it with dialog to make things better.

[@efcsscfe2208]

I love William F Buckley. His brother Reid was my teacher. These southern Brahma leaders are sorely missed

[@joejohn1492]

Just for clarity, they were not from the south.

[@RyanFowler-mw4rk]

Excellent interviewer. Snark, condescension aside, let guests speak.

[@roughhabit9085]

He never did an interview.

[@oldbeatpete]

yes, 'snark' always fit him

[@cullensweeney5678]

The Ginsberg one was beautiful. Great conversation and performances by Allen.

[@geneh460]

I'm not even remotely conservative, but I grew up watching Buckley. He was, in some ways, the definition of "gentlemanly opposition". Today he would be probably too liberal to be a Democrat much less a Republican. That is only a slight exaggeration.

[@ardalire651]

I grew up watching him, too. He was a narcissist and a bigot. People were fooled by his demeanor into legitimizing his radical right wing nonsense.

[@geneh460]

@ardalire651 True, but that ignores the valuable service he provided - in public - of clearly elucidating the pale, slimey, and arrogant nature underpinning American "conservatives" whose only real interest was in conserving class power. That the American public is, by in large, too stupid to have picked up on that at the time is another topic. Don't mistake an admiration of presentation as an endorsement of the man. Evil is still evil whether it is lawful or chaotic.

[@davidjackson2690]

Then you are a big part of the problem.

[@davidjackson2690]

Mailer was such a punk.

[@davidjackson2690]

Chompsky too.

[@joshmulema1540]

i need that mailer sitting angle

[@rumplestilskin5776]

Our times cry out for a Wm F. Buckley.

[@katherinea.rodgers8366]

Yes!

[@roughhabit9085]

Such a man does not belong in these vulgar times.

[@leoanthony7947]

Amen to that !!!

[@denali9643]

We have. Douglas Murray.

[@rumplestilskin5776]

@@denali9643 True but he's not an American

[@gt-gu7rb]

Norman Mailer's " The pleasurable comedy of politics." I wonder if he were alive today would he still feel this way. Great thought in any event.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

Politics has always been a joke.

[@bullsantini]

The level of political discourse in this country is shockingly remedial compared to the 60s. Oh, and Norman mailer, may he rest, was a fool.

[@nedmerrill6228]

Keep thinking of Joe Flaherty’s imitation.

[@4Truth05]

Yes, like many of the comments here, I previously thought William F. B. was an enlightened conservative. But 0.54 minutes into this interview with Groucho Marx when Marx states that although he likes minstrel shows but “because he was brought up in that era,” he thought it was wrong because of the struggle of the “colored people” at that time. Yes, Groucho use the term “colored people” but I will forgive him given his era. BUT Buckley’s response was exactly what we see with today’s MAGA conservatives, what-aboutism- Irish jokes, Jewish jokes!!! Come on Buckley, are you really equating this the hundreds of years struggle of Black Americans to the Irish & Jewish immigrants to America who came on their own volition?! I lost all respect for Buckley with this interview.

[@TheTyTyXD]

Not much changes except accents

[@FPOAK]

If Buckley thinks Ginsberg being a lefty drug user ruins his poetry then it’s a good thing he was never able to interview Blake, Coleridge, Shelley, Byron, etc

[@Robin-399]

That’s not necessarily what he thinks, he’s asking judgmental questions on purpose. Pay attention to the title of the show

[@danluscombe5006]

Nah, he asks that question in a cynical way. As if to say “this is what certain ignorant members of the public feel”. He says as much, and even says he likes abstract poetry.

[@Robin-399]

@@danluscombe5006 I mean maybe, I actually now recall watching the full interview that and I think Buckley genuinely seem a bit skeptical of drug use especially LSD. But to be fair Ginsberg was saying how he was tripping on a super dose of some crazy lsd type to write the poem he read out. And Buckley acknowledged the poem was nice. They are from different worlds. I would bet Buckley took a dose or two at some point though!

[@DarrenKing-jm4qt]

His son Charlie Buckley wrote a terrific book… The Relic Master. Check it out.

[@meganluke444]

Buckley had one son. Christopher.

[@kevinhealey6540]

3;00 All the people I know of who took LSD either got away from it and the ones who didn't destroyed their lives.. I seen one guy take it once. He started screaming, "Hey what we need here are some women." He lost full control of himself. I realized that in the state he was in, anyone could have taken full advantage of him.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

Lives destroyed?

[@kevinhealey6540]

@@ricardocantoral7672 Excuse me, but I think that's self explanatory..

[@markbrusberg9808]

I remember this show and while I was too young to appreciate the nuances in the topics being addressed, I admired the way people spoke to each other as adults (mostly - I do remember some dust ups) even when they were diametrically opposed, politically. Really a shame what political discourse has turned into.

[@user-zb6cv1eo6f]

Brilliant men

[@Spiral.Dynamics]

This is good.

[@johnnotrealname8168]

Why did it go out of air? An interview about the Iraq War would have been interesting from him.

[@roughhabit9085]

Um he took himself off the air after 33 years. Is that okay with you?

[@johnnotrealname8168]

@@roughhabit9085 What?

[@drm9979]

just informationally, Buckley opposed the Iraq War, not after it started like most, before and after.

[@AW-zk5qb]

@@johnnotrealname8168 by the time he retired in 1999, Buckley was quite an old man, I believe he was 73 or 74

[@johnnotrealname8168]

@@AW-zk5qb Nice. I want more!

[@dogcowrph]

“Coloured” people. 😂

[@AndyLehrer]

As in the NAACP. As times change so does what language is acceptable.

[@wwbuirkle]

@@AndyLehrer I think it made a comeback. I keep hearing people of color

[@AndyLehrer]

@@wwbuirkle not the same.

[@wwbuirkle]

@@AndyLehrer Oh yea do you make the rules up?

[@AndyLehrer]

@@wwbuirkle It's just a fact, it's not the same thing.

[@billbernhard3582]

Often enough though, words become a matrix for befuddlement, in which we feel comfortable having 'discussed' problems, while also reducing our need to demand the needed scheduling for repairs. Words calm and quiet, very often. When we NEED to ethically challenge and disturb SCOTUS, for example, words become a barrier to fixes ! Mr. Buckley was a rather drole master of the 'word', student of literacy as he was. Sometimes, we just need to put our collective finger in a dike and stop the damage, here in 2024 ! Trump & the Republicans are full of words. They all continue the damage, rather than ending it.

[@roberte.6892]

6:06

I've watched the complete version of the debate between Buckley and Chomsky. Honest conservatives concede that Chomsky wiped the floor with WFB.

[@williamf.buckleyjr3227]

A rather slippery version of the no-true-Scotsman logical fallacy. I digress. You didn't watch a "version" of it, you watched it.

@@williamf.buckleyjr3227 Picky picky. Your point being that there's no such thing as a honest conservative?

[@michaellynch743]

Haha black panther guy isn’t even coherent

[@RetiredVet2020]

He would be spinning in his grave to see what happened to the Republicans

[@AndyLehrer]

His son voted for Obama.

[@roughhabit9085]

Kissinger said he single handedly shifted American politics to the right. Unfortunately it was a pendulum swing . It’s not the Republicans that would disappoint him.

[@RetiredVet2020]

@@roughhabit9085 not entirely true

[@loupasternak]

would be ? he is

[@danielperry1737]

He criticized Trump in article in Cigar Aficionado. He would not have been pleased with him.

[@conradgaarder2789]

Groucho resents Myron Cohen? That’s ridiculous.

[@tarnopol]

My favorite moment was when he screamed at Chomsky backstage after being exposed on air by him as the superficially urbane, uninformed rightwing hack he was, saying he’d have him in again to tear Chomsky to pieces. Never got around to it somehow. What a jewel he was, Buckley!

[@kaustabhkalita2476]

This never happened

[@tarnopol]

@@kaustabhkalita2476 Except that it did. Chomsky’s talked about it.

[@kaustabhkalita2476]

@@tarnopol what did happen, according to chomsky was that, buckley seemed angry after the show and said he would have him on later again. Buckley was an epistemological optimist, he believes that ideas that are preposterous should be discarded and not be given the day of light in an individual capacity. In the first decade of firing line, when liberalism was still rampant in american discourse and the american people were it could be argued forming a liberal character he had on people of the liberal dispensation and greatly discredited most of them and their ideas as not having to deal with anything close to reality, and in doing so he distinctly changed the american character to more conservative dispensation.

[@tarnopol]

@@kaustabhkalita2476 So, it did happen. Buckley was a PR package designed to launder monstrosities, like Vietnam, for audiences easily bamboozled by baroque diction. Like you.

[@kaustabhkalita2476]

@@tarnopol just being seemingly angry for not being able to completely skewer an outwardly polite man in a 40 minute discussion doesnt mean he was right about vietnam. They were talking about vietnam ad nauseam in those days, to be interesting every show buckley tries to come at it from different avenues. He gave the american people too much credit and in doing so failed to predict chomsky could have an influence on the self destructive boomers and some of their children. He should have sticked to his tedious but strong points about vietnam for posterity' sake, at thr sake of being boring and disrespectful to his audience, a thing he greatly despised being. Your quarrel with bill seems to be his willingness to use words that other people might not know. Words come into existense not by jury or a standing committee. Words are formed because there is a felt need for it. Its an ode to freedom and to the people who came before us.

[@AlexKomnenos]

Noam Chomsky is such a wind bag

[@marcweeks9178]

Really, that's your take? Most TV pundits just spout things they believe are conventional wisdom, but Chomsky is always prepared to back up his assertions with evidence. He's pointed out many times that this is what keeps him from being invited to the usual shows (Face the Nation and the like). You can't say controversial things because you don't have time to lay out an argument between commercial breaks. This means that you only have time to repeat conventional wisdom ("US good, Russia bad"). Televised discourse suffers as a result.

[@WintersWar]

Marx says he resents jokes towards various denomination, then goes on to lampoon Catholics. He was an incontinent fellow.

[@loupasternak]

what continent did he come from ?

[@christopherlangdon2892]

Mailer was a pompous fool in his support for Castro.

[@wwbuirkle]

I would still take him over Chomsky

[@IanBerg]

I bet Norman Mailer also admired fellow Castro supporter Canadian prime minister Pierre Trudeau at that time though Mailer would not have been impressed by Justin Trudeau.

[@dtcharo]

Giving the speaker a transatlantic accent and using the veneer of civil discourse doesn't polish a turd. Long-form discussion isn't gone it's just buried under the swamp of infotainment and outrage porn. With that said, I find the opining over civility politics to be silly. I'm happy to eschew civil discourse if there's no substance to the discourse or it is used to obfuscate bad policy.

[@jamesoliver6625]

Just how irrelevant to history are Ginsberg and Mailer. I remember seeing the Newton discussion as broadcast and coming away thinking all he did was embarrass himself.

[@TheGreatAlan75]

Would love to see Buckley ripping "wokeism" to absolute shreds 🤦

[@volkerkalhoefer3973]

That would be an uneven match like womens boxing Olympics 😂🤣😂

[@xbulsara]

Buckley wasn’t a WASP strictly speaking, but his creepy superciliousness made him an honorary member.

[@ricardocantoral7672]

More like a WASC

[@CharlesDickens111]

Creepy superciliousness sounds like Don Lemon.

[@bloosart]

Is there anything more soothing than Buckley's forced accent of elitism?

[@jasonhurd4379]

Buckley's accent is even more astonishing when one considers that English was his third language, not his first.

[@analogdesigner]

Norman Mailer looks like George W Bush!

[@WilliamByronIs]

Buckley was the proto Tucker Carlson- at least Buckley had served in the military, I suppose- and Norman Mailer continues to show how out of touch the literary intellectual sect has always been with his pretentious wording. Great footage though, I'm appreciative.

[@isaacslomski-pritz3116]

Would Tucker Carlson have had Noam Chomsky and Allen Ginsberg on his show?

[@darbyheavey406]

Tucker not in the same zip code as Buckley.

[@jec1ny]

Tucker Carlson is a clown and demagogue for hire. Buckley, was the real deal. Agree with him or not, he was a very serious intellectual and a man who always showed great civility towards those with whom he disagreed, provided he saw them as basically honorable people. He was also extremely well grounded in facts and never trafficked in loony conspiracy theories. Nor would he have given the time of day to a conman like Donald Trump. Buckley was at the forefront of the move to purge the lunatic right from the ranks of the GOP in the late 50s and early 1960s. He was a savage critic of groups like the John Birch Society (the MAGA of that era).

[@shiloh6915]

Tucker and Buckley were both former CIA

[@roughhabit9085]

They are identical, except that Buckley had charm , wit , and a lot more intelligence.

[@jonathanboud7825]

All these interviews really show, above all, is that Buckley was quite dumb and an average interviewer. He gets owned all the time.

[@TheTyTyXD]

This show was so goddamn pretentious and out of touch. Amazing

[@WB-yw4pb]

who was the dude in the white shirt with the fro at the end....talking like he has marbles in his mouth couldnt even form a proper sentance....talk about dumbing down the show...jeez

[@larryparis925]

Groucho was a fine entertainer and commentator, particularly in the era he grew up and performed in. Not perfect, but well-worth watching. Buckley, on the other hand, was a F***ING bore. Groucho had much higher standards than that jerk.

[@777jones]

Well said. Groucho was electrifying. Norman Mailer is an annoying pest and Buckley strikes a pose without really putting it to use.

[@2nostromo]

If you find WFB boring there is no hope for you.

[@larryparis925]

@@2nostromo On the contrary, I am optimistic and hopeful for a progressive future. Sorry for your loss.

[@WillhelmBuddesweir]

@@larryparis925 How much more progressive? Most of the West has been extremely progressive these last few decades, some more than others. And at this point in time, things are clearly regressing. What are you hoping for exactly, in your own words?

[@larryparis925]

@@2nostromoWell, so much the worse for you. But thank you for your irrelevant comment.

[@rexracernj7696]

Groucho is SO much more intelligent than that erudite poser WFB, in so many ways. Note at the beginning how WFB is intent on justifying racial jokes (he was a poorly-disguised bigot) but Groucho sticks to his guns. Yeah, I often watched Firing Line back in the day, admired WFB's vocab, but recognized that it masked a mediocre intellect.

[@notlikely4468]

Hearing Buckley always makes me think of Mill "What I stated was, that the Conservative party was, by the law of its constitution, necessarily the stupidest party. Now, I do not retract this assertion; but I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it. Now, if any party, in addition to whatever share it may possess of the ability of the community, has nearly the whole of its stupidity, that party, I apprehend, must by the law of its constitution be the stupidest party. And I do not see why hon. Gentlemen should feel that position at all offensive to them; for it ensures their being always an extremely powerful party. I know I am liable to a retort, an obvious one enough, and as I do not intend any hon. Gentleman to have the credit of making it, I make it myself. It may be said that if stupidity has a tendency to Conservatism, sciolism and half-knowledge have a tendency to Liberalism. Well, Sir, something might be said for that-but it is not at all so clear as the other. There is an uncertainty about half-informed people. You cannot count upon them. You cannot tell what their way of thinking may be. It varies from day to day, perhaps with the last book they have read. They are a less numerous class, and also an uncertain class. But there is a dense solid force in sheer stupidity-such, that a few able men, with that force pressing behind them, are assured of victory in many a struggle; and many a victory the Conservative party have owed to that force." It would be wonderful to get to some form of heaven and find those two siting across from each other

[@SoarSeeMusic]

Margaret Hoover is a Buckley want to be. Not even close.

[@R.Kinney1492]

Too, Jewish for me.

[@MaryWorkman-hq9jw]

Buckley while astute and intelligent was not a good person and used his talent to do bad

[@richardpatrick2852]

Really?

[@loupasternak]

@@richardpatrick2852 ignore silly posters

[@oldbeatpete]

​@@richardpatrick2852yes- he didn't work for the good of people, he worked to advance his own idiosyncratic Interpretations