First I read William F. Buckley by Jeremy, one book in a series called Christian Encounters, published by Thomas Nelson. These are short books dealing specifically with the Christian faith of various historical figures—John Bunyan, Sir Isaac Newton, and Winston Churchill, for example—and Buckley is the most recently living person profiled in the series.
I’ve always thought Mr. Buckley was a fascinating man; his wit, vocabulary, and, of course, his accent were quite attractive to me. I’m a political conservative, so I enjoyed most of his ideas, too. But I must say the manipulation of words and the way he spoke were the real draw whenever I listened to him, which was not very often. Anyway, Lott’s treatment of Mr. Buckley’s faith and its influence on his public persona was thorough, but a little disjointed. I felt as if I should have read a more complete biography of William F. Buckley first, and then read Lott’s dissertation to fill in the blanks, if any, in reference to Buckley’s Catholic faith and practice. And there were places where Jeremy Lott could have used a better editor; in one section he refers to “the event”, and I never did understand what the event he was referencing was.
Reading this incomplete, but tantalizing biographical treatment of William F. Buckley’s life, made me want to read some more of Buckley’s writing and a thorough biography of the man. I also wondered what WFB thought about Rush Limbaugh and other younger conservative firebrands, since the next book I read was Andrew Breitbart’s new book, Righteous Indignation: Excuse Me While I Save the World! I tend to think that WFB would have enjoyed Mr. Breitbart, even if he found the younger man a bit brash and vainglorious (as I did). I googled Rush and Buckley together and found this quote from Sam Tanenhaus who was supposed to be writing a biography of William F. Buckley at the time of this interview: “He (Buckley) liked Rush Limbaugh, who was published in National Review, but was more skeptical of Ann Coulter, whose book “Treason†he reviewed.” Mr.Tanenhaus’s biography must be DOA or still in abeyance.
Anyway, back to Breitbart, who were he here in person, would likely not have allowed my focus to stray from him and his mission to save the world for so long. Egotistical much? Yes, although similar to Rush Limbaugh’s persona, it’s part ego and part showmanship. Mr. Breitbart says in the book that Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge, and Ann Coulter are his heroes, and I would say that Breitbart does a creditable job of emulating that trio while still being an original. He also uses the ideas of community organizer Saul Alinsky to out-maneuver the most devious media manipulators of the left, and when all else fails and he realizes that he’s sounding like a crazy conservative, he pleads ADHD and plunges on to the next controversy.
It’s all highly entertaining, if you’re on his side, the conservative/libertarian side, and even if you’re not, it might be worth reading to see how the other half thinks and lives. Mr. Breitbart, if you’re not familiar with him, is the man behind the ACORN expose, and his web of of blogs, including BigHollywood, BigGovernment, Big Journalism, and BIgPeace, are his attempts to replace what he calls the “Democrat-Media Complex” with a New Media, more responsive to and in touch with the people it claims to serve.
As I said already, I enjoyed the book, even though Mr. Breitbart is something of a one-note Charlie. His message is that the liberals/Democrats control the mainstream media, and that to defeat the Dems conservatives have to discredit and defeat the Democrat-Media Complex. Oh, and the way to take out the mainstream media is to use the tactics that they’ve been using for years, the tactics of Saul Alinsky and the Huffington Post and the not-so-mainstream media.
I’m mostly in agreement with Andrew Breitbart, just as I mostly agree with William F. Buckley, Jr. And either man would make a scintillating dinner conversationalist or a highly explosive and dramatic political speaker. I would prefer to stay on their good side because I’m not as quick-witted as Buckley was, nor does my mind jump around as rapidly as Breitbart’s ADHD enables him to do. If you’re of the conservative persuasion already, you’ll enjoy both books in spite of their flaws and despite the inevitable character flaws of the subjects, Buckley and Breitbart.
If you lean toward the left politically speaking, you might find ammunition in one or both of the books, but probably not much pleasure.
