That's really a shame. I hold him up as a paragon of respectful discourse and a willingness to engage intellectually with persons who old different opinions. Jonah Goldberg (in spite of his idiotic and apparently tedious new book) and Franklin Foer (in spite of his poor judgment) have continued that approach in their periodic video discussions on The New Republic's web site. Sadly, that model of civil discourse has largely been supplanted by screaming fights and talking points. His articles about drug legalization were probably the best I ever read on that subject.
It hasn't been a great couple of years for conservatives, losing Reagan, Harry Browne, Milton Friedman and now Buckley. So who is the remaining conservative intelectual muscle? Or the remaining liberal muscle for that matter?
You know that he once threatened to punch Gore Vidal "in the God damned nose" on national t.v. But generally I agree with you. In law school, reading National Review gave me the same thrill that Playboy would have given a teenager in an all boys Catholic school. (Well, not really)
Well, nobody's perfect, and Vidal did seem to provoke similar reactions from other people, like Norman Mailer. As far as who is carrying the mantle of conservative intellectualism . . . Francis Fukyama, perhaps? I can't think of anyone else off the top of my head.
I raised this issue almost 2 years ago in a discussion about Ann Coulter: I guess I need to devote my life now full time to conservative intellectualism (no not). As for Vidal, I find him annoying too. Mostly, I think he is a crypto-totalitarian.
I don't think there really are any polymaths like Buckley or Vidal anymore. Everyone has their two or three hot-button issues or peddles outrage. One of the great under-appreciated strengths about the intellectual portion of the conservative movement was how people like Buckley and Will kept the debate about principals alive. If you had aspirations toward intellectual leadership in the conservative movement, you had to be able to engage on a number of issues. The liberals, on the other hand, allowed thinkers to remain in silos, especially after Moynahan passed from the scene and didn't really develop polymaths. In my opinion, the best polymath, who is capable of engaging on a large number of disparate issues and tieing them together through basic principal is Gregg Easterbrook when he write Tuesday Morning Quarterback. I don't agree with a lot of his opinions, but he's able to write on the same plane as Buckley, but without the same personality.
I must have been totally out of it when I wrote the above post last night. I forgot to mention Mark Steyn.
Many of those people mentioned have been longtime contributors to The American Spectator, R Emmett Tyrrell's magazine. Tyrrell is the only other one comparable to Buckley, not quite as towering but still one of my favorites. RIP WFB. Up From Liberalism is still a good read.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYymnxoQnf8 Gore Vidal: "As far as I'm concerned, the only sort of pro-crypto-Nazi I can think of is yourself." William F. Buckley: "Now listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi, or I'll sock you in your god damn face and you'll stay plastered." ultimately Buckley himself admitted he was deeply embarrassed about losing his composure http://www.10zenmonkeys.com/2008/02/28/the-collected-controversies-of-william-f-buckley/