print‘Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent’ ~ Ludwig Wittgenstein
This is rich! (In-hysterics emoji)
Against the backdrop of the retirement of the superb Patrick J. Buchanan, some cipher—that’s a melodic word for a zero, a nobody—at The American Conservative, which I recommend avoiding like spam for penis extensions, one Declan Leary declares that Pat Buchanan “was not a great writer.”
Mr. Buchanan is a very fine writer! Spare and strong, easily great.
Let’s see: A nullity, Declan Leary, implies Buchanan was a mediocre writer, and does so while writing—nay embodying—mediocre, nondescript prose. I’m in stitches here.
Leary is still a pipsqueak, but you don’t grow talent. You either have it or you don’t. It is self-evident that Leary’s prose is never going to be anything but nondescript. (Experience Declan for yourself in “Against ‘Buchananism.’”)
I do declare that Declan Leary is engaged in something of a performative contradiction.
“Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent,” said Ludwig Wittgenstein, a great analytic philosopher.
*Lawrence Auster and I were first to denounce the American Conservative.
Loved Pat Buchanan. I followed him and his columns for years, always looked forward to them. I greatly appreciated his knowledge of history and his respect and appreciation of history. It was infectious. He wrote many books. I read two, The Death of the West and Suicide of a Superpower. Enjoyed both a lot. I think he and Sam Francis were good friends. I was glad of that, because Sam was another of my favorite writers. My only regret for Pat was that he thought the “birthday” of the Christian Church began on the day of Pentecost. That wasn’t the “Christian” Church, Pat. That was the Jewish, messianic church, the “little flock.” The church the body of Christ began with Paul in Acts 9, not in ch. 2 of Acts. It’s a disastrous error.