And not just Brookhiser. If you’ve spent any time at blogs run by ex-NRniks, those attempting regularly to distance themselves from movement-conservative orthodoxies not excepted, you still run hard into a you-can-take-the-boy-out-of-the-womb residual stain of the dyer’s hand: where once bowing cap-in-hand before Dad’s authority sat the throne, the urge to flip him the bird regularly in the form of exhibitionist heart-on-sleeve mea gulpas and ritual shaking of fistfuls of screw-you-Pop defiance plots palace coups; the prospect of quietly packing one’s steamer trunk once the fetid swamp within has been clearly discerned, slipping away by coach in the night to the shores of light where sits a vessel bound for lands undreamed, and saying Goodbye to All That by implication rather than constant shriving would seem to have been ruled off the table. It’s part of the illusion that is conservatism tout court: the fetish for preserving “roots” at all costs, the belief that the proverbial yelling of Stop! athwart history really is possible, the illusion that our fate is one of anything but that of permanent exile in wandering and eternal flux…

Those rights and well being are theirs alone to maintain. They are not a universal construction that must be at all times upheld. If the “brown people” are oppressing each other that needs to be their concern, not that of an international steward. As Daniel McCarthy recommends, we need to stand aside in the Middle East and, with eyes most watchful, let the impending fitna within Dar el Islam take place.

There’s an undercurrent of revenge in what Brookhiser has writen about Buckley lately. It’s a way of getting back at WFB for dangling the editorship in front of him for years and then revoking the offer. But reading Rick’s book makes one think that Buckley was right about him (that’s also true of “What Would the Founders Do” — there really wasn’t anything there). Brookhiser just doesn’t think for himself or have an interesting take on things. he’s a follower, rather than a leader.

This also indicates just how central Middle Eastern issues are to National Review today. There’s nothing else that Brookhiser would go to such lengths to needle his readers about, and nothing else that the staff is really willing to go out on a limb for.

Neocons, oh neocons. Thanks for the laughs.

I’ll never forget asking a black friend what he thought of that, and his simple and elegant response: “That she learned to bullshit from the master.”

These are not “brown” people, necessarily. WFB after a long yacht trip was probably darker than many of them.

I’ve never actually confronted a hard-core progressive/liberal about Obama’s escalation in Afganistan or lack of initiative in Iraq, and it’s been a long time since I bothered arguing with a neocon. I think I’ll give it a try this weekend. I’ll report back if anyone calls me a racist.