From: badlydrawnjeff	Date: February 29th, 2008 04:30 am (UTC)		(Link)

I'd think realizing he was wrong is one reason to say that perhaps he was a little more evolved than some of his critics would like to assert.

	From: debg	Date: February 29th, 2008 07:25 am (UTC)		(Link)

Yeah, when the headstone ought to read "mean prick" alongside "eloquent", it's hard to be anything other than profoundly underwhelmed.

	From: girasole	Date: February 29th, 2008 01:42 pm (UTC)		(Link)
	In some defense of Buckley

I would like to see a more exact citation. Be that as it may, his ideas did develop and change over the decades, and that was 1957. What he gave to American debate and discourse was an extraordinary use of language, and for some of us, the belief that a conservative could actually have a working brain.
I will say that his language had a great influence on my 14-year-old self. I became a Jesuit-trained philosophical hippie mama flower child, but his language gave me something to lean and fight against.

	From: quarkwiz	Date: February 29th, 2008 02:08 pm (UTC)		(Link)

I wish I could find where I saw this so I could give you a link. I thought it was the thread in Making Light, but am not seeing it there. So... someone, somewhere wrote (paraphrased):

"We're only supposed to say good things about the deceased.

William F. Buckley is dead.

Good."