VIDEO: Firing Line: Wm. F. Buckley Jr: the fight over Catholic Orthodoxy

The crisis within the Roman Catholic Church is not new. The fight to protect the True Faith against modernist novelties and heresy began about 30 seconds after the end of the Second Vatican Council (aka Vatican II). 

The Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), at the centre of the latest controversy (WWW passim) was founded on 1 November 1970, in Écône, Switzerland, by French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. It was established to preserve traditional Catholic theology and the Latin Mass, so to resist the "reforms" of Vatican II. 

Some 10 years later, William F. Buckley Jr., a traditional Catholic (and leading political conservative), invited Michael Davies, Joseph Champlin, and Malachi Martin onto Firing Line, his popular TV show, to discuss the issues and the future of Holy Mother Church. 

Their thoughts resonate clearly today, as the destruction of Holy Mother Church by Her enemies within looms on the horizon. Listen up.

 

Now would be a very good time to pray to "St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our defencc against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly hosts, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan, and all the evil spirits, who prowl through the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen."

VIDEO: Michael Matt on the Godless agenda of "good Catholics"

Michael Matt, editor of The Remnant newspaper, has asked us to share his latest video: "THE GODLESS AGENDA: From Davos to the Vatican". He writes:

I start out with something that struck me about the escalating problem of President Joe "The Catholic" Biden and his war on "domestic terrorists”: Is this where Neo-Catholicism ends up? Sixty years after Vatican II, "reformed" Catholics will become the jailors of freedom-loving patriots? First they canceled God’s rights, and now they’re going to cancel ours? 

Biden calls us domestic terrorists, Pelosi wants us in jail, AOC wants to defund the police, Guterres over at the UN wants to force our kids to get vaxxed and brainwashed, Melinda Gates is trying to depopulate Africa, and Francis of Rome is cancelling our Mass. To a man, these disturbed people all claim to be "Catholics in good standing"!

Gavin Newsom, Tony Fauci, the Cuomo brothers – they all claim to be Catholic, and yet they’re hellbent on criminalizing anyone who disagrees with them. At the same time, Pope Francis's agenda lines up perfectly with that of Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, and George Soros. Houston, we’ve got a problem!

Using vintage testimony from William F. Buckley and Michael Davies, I explain why attacking the traditional Catholic Mass and Sacraments has always been key to the establishment of a new globalist political order, what some might call the Reign of Antichrist and others hail as the Great Reset.

Looking at all this, I can’t help but ask the question: How much worse does it have to get before we fall on our knees and beg God to return from His banishment to save this brave new burning world? As I explain in this video, the Covid narrative may be coming apart at the seams. But, even if it is, we have only a brief window of opportunity to prepare to do a better job defending our country and our Church from whatever these demon "Catholics" come up with next. 

 

Mr Matt concludes: Only God can save us now. So, let's bring Him back. Please join me in calling this crusade. This may well be our last chance... but at least we have a chance. God is good! 

Walt can only say "Amen!"

VIDEO: Wm. F. Buckley talks with Ian Smith, Prime Minister of Rhodesia

Regular readers of WWW will know that I have an abiding interest in Zimbabwe, a dictatorship in southern Africa which went from being the second-most prosperous on the Dark Continent to what Still-President Trump would now call a "shithole".

I lived and worked in Zimbabwe in the 90s, and could see the handwriting on the wall after the former Big Man, Robert Gabriel Mugabe, decided to pay all his "war veterans" gratuities of Z$50,000 each after they had staged a series of protests, claiming that they had not received the "benefits" of their revolt against the "white settler regime", viz: white cars, white houses and white women.

The unbudgeted payouts saw the Zimbabwe dollar lose its value by 70% in one day -- I remember it well -- and analysts say the move signalled Zimbabwe's well-documented economic collapse. Banknotes were issued in denominations of billions and even trillions of dollars and were literally not worth the paper they were printed on.

The Mugabe government abandoned the "Zimkwacha" because of hyperinflation in 2009 -- 1 US dollar was worth around Z$35 quadrillion at the time -- and started using American dollars and South African rand. 

But I digress. I was about to tell you that when I first went to Africa, there was no Zimbabwe. The country was then known as Rhodesia, a former British colony which declared its independence from No-longer-great Britain on 11 November 1965. I went there about four years later, over five years before William F. Buckley Jr. went there to record this interview with Prime Minister Ian Smith. 

I went to Rhodesia on a fact-finding mission, to see for myself whether the Africans (by which was meant "blacks") were so badly off under white minority rule as was argued by the "progressives" at the United Nations, the World Council of Churches and elsewhere. I concluded that it would be a mistake -- detrimental to the well-being of the Africans -- to overthrow the "white settler government" and impose "majority rule". But it was clear even then, in 1969, that the mistake was going to be made, in the name of "freedom and equality, yada yada yada. The mistake was made, and the result is the shithole that is Zimbabwe today. 

In this interview, recorded in April of 1974, Ian Smith makes the case for the continuation of minority rule until the majority population should be ready to govern themselves. Mr Smith was right, but of course that doesn't matter now, does it. 

One thing to note, at about the 38-minute mark, is that Mr Smith asserts that the black revolutionaries were financed and trained by Communist China. Of course today's China would never do that kind of thing.

Further viewing: Thames Television documentary visit to Rhodesia, June 1975. Includes interview with Ian Smith.  

VIDEO: Enoch Powell interviewed by William F. Buckley Jr.

Over nine years ago, we posted "'I told you this would happen!': Enoch Powell", referencing Mr Powell's "Birmingham Speech" -- that was what he called it -- of 20 April 1968. The speech became better known as "the Rivers of Blood speech", for the Rt. Hon. Mr Powell had the courage to say what had already become politically incorrect. Like what? Britain (he said) would rue the day when it opened the doors to 1000s of third-world immigrants who would not or could not be assimilated into British society.

He was right, of course, but for the sin of telling the truth, Enoch Powell was forever branded as a racist, and drummed out of the British Conservative Party's shadow cabinet. A little over a year later, he appeared on Firing Line, the late lamented TV programme hosted by the also-late, also-lamented Willliam F. Buckley, Jr. Here is the complete interview.

Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen to be beatified in Peoria December 21st

Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria IL announced on Monday that the Vatican has approved plans for the beatification of Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen. The ceremony will take place at 1000 EST at the Cathedral of Saint Mary of the Immaculate Conception in Peoria.

"This is the same cathedral where (Archbishop) Sheen was ordained a priest 100 years ago, on Sept. 20, 1919," said a Peoria diocesan news release. "It seems entirely fitting that the beatification will take place at the end of this 100-year anniversary of his ordination to the priesthood."

The beatification was scheduled just weeks after the conclusion of a lengthy legal battle between the Peoria diocese and the Archdiocese of New York over the final resting place of the late prelate's remains. His remains are presently entombed in a marble vault in the Peoria cathedral, next to the altar where he was ordained.

Walt has mentioned or written about Archbishop Sheen several times over the years. The most popular of these post is "Venerable Fulton J. Sheen interviewed by Wm. F. Buckley Jr.", WWW 14/7/19, which features a 53-minute video of the prelate's appearance on William F. Buckley's Firing Line TV programme. Although the interview is almost half a century old, it still provides many insights which are relevant to a world... and a Church... which has become much worse in the intervening years.

VIDEO: Venerable Fulton J. Sheen interviewed by Wm. F. Buckley Jr.

We have a long (53:20) and serious video for you, suitable for a Sunday when one should spend at least some time reflecting on higher matters. This is Episode 186 of Firing Line with William F. Buckley, Jr., recorded on 6 January 1970. Mr. Buckley's guest is Archbishop Fulton J.Sheen, whose earthly remains have recently been returned to the Diocese of Peoria and whose cause for beatification is now proceeding. Although the interview is almost half a century old, it still provides many insights which are relevant to a world which has become much worse in the intervening years.

Best Remnant TV VIDEO... ever!

It seems like just yesterday that we featured Michael Matt, editor of The Remnant, talking about the latest stupidities emanating from the Vatican. [It was six days ago. Ed.] That was a fine video, but the one we're embedding today is even better. In fact, it may be (IMHO) the best video from down in the Catacombs that I have ever seen.

As Facebook blocks ads that include photos of the Vatican's weird Nativity scene -- for being sexually provocative! -- Mr Matt comments on this and other indicators that suggest a weakening of the gale force Modernist winds that have been blowing the Catholic Church off course for half a century or more.

Has Pope Francis gone too far? What are we to make of the latest news regarding Robert Cardinal Sarah? What about the New Mass? Has it contracted a terminal disease? Mr Matt thinks the winds of change are blowing this Christmas. They bring bad news, yes, but also clear signs of hope and a worldwide Catholic awakening.

Plus... you won't believe what William F. Buckley Jr thought of the Second Vatican Council and its New Mass. If I'd heard at the time what he said forty years ago, I'd have saved myself a lot of intellectual torment and emotional grief.

Dear Catholic readers, please listen up! And MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Perry v. Paul: who's right about American involvement in foreign wars?

With all the meeja fawning over Hellery Clinton -- Will she run? Won't she run? Does it matter? -- not a whole lot of attention is being paid to the fact that two Republican presidential hopefuls are having a "conversation" [I hereby ban the use of that word to mean anything other than a private chat between two individuals! Ed.] on one important subject where Hellery and her former boss are very vulnerable -- foreign policy.

Senator Rand Paul kicked off the debate [That's better. Ed. last month with "America Shouldn't Choose Sides in Iraq's Civil War", in which he criticized not just the Prez's mishandling of the crisis, but the invasion commanded by President Bush II, which got America into the mess to begin with.

Texas Governor Rick Perry disagrees with Senator Paul's preaching of non-interventionism. In "Isolationist policies make the threat of terrorism even greater", he argued that "Many people are tired of war, and the urge to pull back is a natural, human reaction. Unfortunately, we live in a world where isolationist policies would only endanger our national security even further."

Mr. Perry goes on to question his potential rival's interpretation of President Reagan's foreign policy. "Paul conveniently omitted Reagan's long internationalist record of leading the world with moral and strategic clarity," wrote Mr. Perry. "Unlike the noninterventionists of today, Reagan believed that our security and economic prosperity require persistent engagement and leadership abroad."

Walt doesn't like to criticize an erstwhile conservative Republic, but the Governor listeth. [Errr... that line has already been used by Bill Buckley. Ed.] OK, let's just say "Rick Perry is Dead Wrong"! [Yeah, that's what Paul said, in Politico Magazine, just yesterday! Ed.]

The way Senator Paul sees it, "The let's-intervene-and-consider-the-consequences-later crowd left us with more than 4,000 Americans dead, over 2 million refugees and over trillions of dollars in debt.... Tough talk like Perry's might inspire some for the moment, but when bombast becomes policy it can have long and disastrous consequences."

Mr. Paul also points out that Mr. Perry's criticism of the Reagan foreign policy is miles off-base. "Reagan was stern, but he wasn't stupid. Reagan hated war, particularly the spectre of nuclear war." Which is pretty much what Pat Buchanan said in Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War, by Pat Buchanan, reviewed favourably here a few days ago. Here's how Mr. Buchanan sees American "inaction" -- NON-intervention -- during the Reagan years.

"US inaction was not due to cowardice but cold calculation as to what was worth risking war with a nuclear-armed Soviet Union and what was not worth risking war. When the Polish workers' movement, Solidarity, was crushed in 1981, Ronald Reagan denounced the repression but he neither broke diplomatic relations with Warsaw nor imposed economic sanctions.

"Eisenhower and Reagan were not Chamberlains, but neither were they Churchills. Who ruled in the capitals east of the Elbe was not to them a vital US interest worth a war. They believed in defending what we had, not risking war to retake what Roosevelt and Churchill had given up.... Reagan believed America and freedom were the future, that Communism was headed for the ash heap of history, that we need not, indeed, must not blunder into a war to hasten its inevitable end. Patience and perseverance were required, the use of proxies to bedevil the Soviet Empire at its outposts...and carrying a bigger stick -- that was the Reagan way."

As a favour to Governor Perry, who appears to be as untutored in history as was President Bush II, Walt presents a further quote from the Buchanan opus, on the question of whether America should be the world's policeman.

"America is the last superpower because she stayed out of the world wars until their final acts. And because she stayed out of the alliances and the world wars longer than any other great power, America avoided the fate of the seven other nations that entered the twentieth century as great powers.

"The British, French, German, Austro-Hungarian, Russian, Ottoman, and Japanese empires are all gone. We alone remain, because we had men who recalled the wisdom of Washington, Jefferson, and John Quincy Adams about avoiding entangling alliances, staying out of European wars, and not going 'abroad in search of monsters to destroy'."

Walt hopes Governor Perry or (please God) Senator Paul or whoever next occupies the Oval Office will take this advice to heart. Otherwise a lot more Americans are going to be dead...for the wrong reasons!

So, there's a new bad English fad

So... since when has it become acceptable to start a sentence with "So..."?

Examples: "So... the stock market was up nearly 100 points today, in spite of large losses in the energy sector." That sentence was uttered by a supposedly educated business commentator on a TV newscast. But you hear it in everyday conversation too: "So... I'm walkin' down the street, eh, and this really big guy bumps into me..." Perhaps the speaker was not so well educated. [Certainly a Canuck! Ed.] Walt has even seen it in print (on the Net) in a post on a forum for... wait for it... English teachers! "So, I found a job in China, but now I changed my mind..."

My guess is that there has been so much criticism, on WWW and elsewhere, of the use of "like" as a "pause word" that people who wish to sound as if they've advanced beyond primary school have settled on "so" as a "higher-class" alternative. They must think "So..." sounds better than "Like...". It doesn't! So, let's stop using "So..." at the beginning of a sentence to signify, "Hey, I'm gonna talk now."

While I'm at it, may I plead, yet again, for the teaching of English vocabulary in journalism schools. Will those who write for the lamestream media please stop using words of whose meaning they are unsure! Examples:
"wrestle" for "wrest" - "The Iraqi army is trying to wrestle Tikrit back from ISIS"
"fulsome" for "full" - "A more fulsome report is expected tomorrow"

As Walt sees it, the problem is that "writers" no longer feel any need or to desire to be readers, first. They don't know less common words, like "fulsome" and "wrest", because they haven't read them, properly used, in the works of people possessed of vocabularies of more than 1000 words.

No, I'm not talking only about 19th-century writers, although Charles Dickens would certainly have known the proper meanings of "wrest" and "fulsome". There are plenty of modern writers, on both sides of the Atlantic, who have great (in the senses of "large" and "excellent") vocabularies. Looking at my bookshelf, I see: William F. Buckley, Bill Bryson, Graham Greene, Studs Terkel and of course Hunter S. Thompson. HST might not have used a word like "fulsome", but I'm sure he knew what it means.

Moral: Read first, then write.
Footnote: I except (not "accept") newsreaders from my criticism. They are only bingo-callers and meat puppets. They read only the autocue. The less-than-literate clods who write what's on the autocue are the real villains.

Bill O'Reilly's latest "book" disappoints

Let's get a couple of things straight. I like Bill O'Reilly. I watch The O'Reilly Factor and enjoy seeing him expose the hypocrisy and barrenness of the the "secular progressive" agenda. Watching him skewer the Prez before the Superbowl was a treat.

You may take from this that I agree with Mr. O'Reilly's point of view on matters political, social and religious. You would be right. (So is he. So am I.) What I wish, however, is that he would restrict his "bloviating" -- his word -- to the airwaves, and leave the polemical writing to someone else.

Why? Because, sadly, Bill O'Reilly is no writer. For him to tout his latest opus, Keep It Pithy (Crowne Archtype, 2013), as "a literary highlight reel" is just wrong. It could be called a book by virtue of being printed on paper and bound in a hard cover, but it is not literature. I'll give him "highlight reel" though, for the "book" is really a collection of snippets from his TV scripts and transcripts. He shares with "my pal Charles Flowers" credit (or blame) for the compilation of the print equivalent of a TV "clip show".

A better compiler or editor might have attempted to impose on the collection some order or coherence. As it is, Mr. O'Reilly covers all the ground from abortion to [Ed., please insert a noun that begins with "Z"], in the zigzag fashion of a drunk wending his way home from the pub. He goes from "a little manual for dealing with the opposite sex" (pp. 102-104) to an argument against the death penalty (pp. 105-106) and onward to how to create your own "No Spin Zone" (pp. 106-109). The transition from the the first topic to the second is handled in that one-liner beloved of stand-up comics, "But, more seriously..." The ellipsis is his.

The ideas are there, all right, but they are neither original nor well-expressed. One wonders if Mr. O'Reilly's thinking is any deeper than shown by such profundities as:
- "Bottom line: Terrorist killers and those who support them are evil. Period." (p. 54)
- "The more stuff I have, the more stuff I want. And so I looked around and saw that everyone else was the same way. It was not until I had a few things that I noticed how this works. The material stuff is addicting!" (p. 57)
- "Why is there so much drug and alcohol abuse in America today? Simple: Alcohol and drugs make huge profits for legal and illegal organizations." (p. 60)
- "Here's the takeaway: If you are after success in America, substance abuse can be your downfall." (ibid.)

How's that for in-depth analysis? I've seen deeper puddles on sidewalks after a summer shower in Arcadia FL! And Keep It Pithy is full of that kind of pith. There's a fair bit of vinegar too, but the whole effect is like listening to a junior high school valedictory speech.

I am a social conservative, a religious traditionalist, and a foe of secular humanism/progressivism and political correctness in all their forms and guises. But I do spend time reading and thinking about issues such as same-sex "marriage", the campaign against public expressions of Christian Faith and the failure of Western foreign policy.

Sometimes I write about these things. So do thinkers who can write much better than I...and much, much better than Bill O'Reilly. Keep It Pithy makes me long to read the deep and well-articulated thoughts of Enoch Powell, or, closer to home, William F. Buckley Jr. If it's a compilation you're after, I recommend Freedom and Reality (a collection of Enoch Powell's speeches: Arlington House, 1969) and/or Quotations from Chairman Bill (self-explanatory: Arlington House, 1970). Both volumes occupy places of honour in my working library here at my cabin in the woods. As for Keep It Pithy, I wouldn't give it shelf space.

Sad footnote: Whatever happened to Arlington House? From 1964 to 1988 it was a publisher of jazz discographies, as well as conservative and anti-communist books. It is now defunct, but you can probably find the titles recommended on Amazon.

Where to find P.J. O'Rourke's best stuff

When I became a man, I put away the things of a child. St. Paul: I Corinthians 13:11

Me too. And one of the childish things I put away -- in a hermetically sealed container under the front porch -- was a complete collection of National Lampoon, right from Number 1 until it went bi-monthly and stopped being funny.

At that time (latter part of the 1970s) the editor of NatLamp was P.J. O'Rourke, possibly the funniest reactionary and humorist of the entire 20th century. (He stopped being funny about the 1st of January 2001, but I've said that before.)

A conservative with a sense of humour is rare but not unique. Walt always admired William F. Buckley Jr. and chuckled at his wry comments, albeit understanding them with the help of Funk and Wagnall. Ron Paul often seems to me to have his tongue stuck firmly in his cheek, although there's always the possibility that he's 100% serious 100% of the time. It's hard to tell.

But the quality O'Rourke stirs into the mix -- a quality seemingly lacking in Buckley and Paul -- is a healthy dose of depravity. In that, P.J. more closely resembles the late great (but not conservative) Hunter S. Thompson, Doctor of Gonzo Journalism.

The resemblance is best seen in what Walt considers O'Rourke's piece: "How to Drive Fast on Drugs While Getting Your Wing-Wang Squeezed and Not Spill Your Drink". Reading it -- even for the umpteenth time -- puts me in mind of my misspent youth. [Last year? Ed.]

So do HST's descriptions, in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, of driving across the desert in the shark, but Thompson's narrative discloses a certain unhealthy depravity, compared with P.J.'s behaviour, which seems to me pretty much normal for a young man of our generation. A judge might disagree with me -- at least one judge has taken serious issue with my views on what's "normal" -- but whether you agree or not, you can't help but LOL at O'Rourke's recipe for a cocktail of hedonistic, reckless fun. A small sample:

Even more important than being drunk, however, is having the right car. You have to get a car that handles really well. This is extremely important, and there's a lot of debate on this subject -- about what kind of car handles best. Some say a front-engined car; some say a rear-engined car. I say a rented car.

Yeah, sure. I can hear all the progressive thinkers say that's totally irresponsible, no social conscience, yada yada yada. But my experience -- and I have had some -- is that you have to go through that verging-on-the-insane phase before you can truly understand the meaning of sanity or even normality. Show me someone who's "normal", and I'll ask him (or her) if he (or she) has always been that way. Chances are the answer will be "Oh no. Back in the day I used to..." Etc.

Hold that thought. What I really wanted to tell you was where -- outside of my complete set of National Lampoons -- to find a selection of P.J. O'Rourke's better articles and essays. Walt recommends Republican Party Reptile (Atlantic Monthly Press, 1987), which contains half a dozen from NatLamp plus a number of pieces which previously appeared in Rolling Stone, House and Garden [Really?! Ed.] and Car and Driver.

One of the C&D items is "High-Speed Performance Characteristics of Pickup Trucks", which all those who have never deviated from "normal" can skip, because you won't understand it. No. Read it so you'll understand those of us who have on occasion broken the confines of conformity.

Footnote: Walt's collection of National Lampoons is for sale. Condition is fine to very fine. If you pay enough I'll throw in the Harvard Lampoon parodies of Time and Life, and the famous High School Yearbook. Exchange of cash and a treasury of humour to be made under the UN flag at the border. E-mail your offer to the usual address.

Crusade for good English

Where is William Safire when we need him so desperately? Alas, he shuffled off the mortal coil back in 2009, and, since no-one has stepped up to the plate, perhaps Walt and Ed. can at least get into the on-deck circle.

Wherever Mr. Safire is, I hope he can't read that introduction. He was a long-time political columnist for the New York Times and the author of "On Language" in the New York Times Magazine. That column dealt with popular etymology, new or unusual usages, and other language-related topics, including the avoidance of overwrought and overused clichés.

Walt has a long-standing love affair with the English language, and was a great admirer of Mr. Safire's efforts to promote good (and witty) usage. A collection of his columns appeared in book form as On Language (Times Books, 1981) and has a place of honour in Walt's working library.

It's good, in a way, that William Safire is not alive today to see what has become of the language of Shakespeare, Milton and Churchill. Or great American writers and speakers like John Steinbeck, William Faulkner, Tom Wolfe and William F. Buckley Jr. Safire must have seen the dumbing-down of the language coming. Not just our language but our entire culture. Perhaps he was glad enough to leave the West to its decline.

Since the advent of "electronic communication", e-mail -- no-one writes proper letters any more -- and "text talk", the English language is not just in decline, but in free-fall. There are a few brave souls who, like King Cnut [careful... Ed.] are trying to stem the tide of illiteracy that threatens to inundate us. Over the next couple of weeks, Walt and Ed. will post some of their writings, with the aim of encouraging our dear readers to write (and speak) better, and eschew "English for dummies",

We begin with a link to "Neil Pasricha’s ‘awesome’ blog helped destroy language", by the Toronto Star's Heather Mallick. In this piece, Ms Mallick inveighs against "linguistic bleaching", which she calls a crime. She refers to the misuse of words in a way that drains them of meaning. Words like "awesome", which is used so often now that it has become awful... and not in the old sense of "full of awe". Please read and heed.

A big thank-you (note the hyphen) to Agents 6 and 17 for pushing us to do this.

Does the Prez really talk like a [you know what]?

You probably didn't see Al O'Bama's speech to the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation on Saturday. Walt couldn't make it. But you likely saw a clip on TV or read the transcript.

Associated Press quoted the Prez of the Former Most Powerful Nation on Earth as telling African-Americans to "Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes. Shake it off. Stop complainin'. Stop grumblin'. Stop cryin'. [My emphasis. Walt] We are going to press on. We have work to do."

Woah! Did the Man really drop his G's like that? Maybe not. Other outlets cleaned up the transcript, making the relevant sentences read "Stop complaining. Stop grumbling. Stop crying." That's the way a college graduate would say it, right? Not to mention a senator or a president.

So why did AP use what a linguistics expert called an "interpretive translation"? On Chris Hayes' MSNBC show, African-American author Karen Hunter called AP's version "racist". [Gee. That didn't even take 24 hours. Ed.] Walt assumes she meant that the politically correct thing to do would be to clean up Al's speech -- specifically including the dropped g's -- so he wouldn't sound like an end-man.

But noted linguistics expert John McWhorter argued the g-less version "is actually the correct one," noting that the president's victory in the 2008 election was due, in part, to how effortlessly "he can switch into that dialect." [Emphasis still mine. Walt]

McWhorter argued that "Black English" -- an oxymoron if ever there was one -- is becoming the lingua franca of American youth, and that "America, including non-black America, loves that way of speaking."

Rumour has it that all candidates for the Democractic nomination will henceforward be required to demonstrate their proficiency in the USA's other language -- ebonics. Walt thinks the last contender who spoke really well was William F. Buckley, Jr.