Larry King

What did Larry King’s audience do to deserve this?

The CNN host has the oddest panel possible on to discuss election results

  • more
    • All Share Services

As a general rule, I try to avoid cable news at all costs — watching it is often just too painful. But Election Night is one of those times when, like some horrible thing out of “A Clockwork Orange,” I’m forced to watch. Tuesday night has, so far, been every bit as bad as I imagined.

True story, could not make this up: CNN’s Larry King, just a few minutes ago, had a special panel on to discuss election results. The panel consisted of — and I want to stress again that I could not possibly make this up — former Minnesota governor and professional wrestler Jesse Ventura, former game show host and Nixon speechwriter Ben Stein and, as a topper, James Carville.

I’ve had nightmares that now, by comparison, seem like a trip to some wonderful island paradise where the free piña coladas never stop flowing.

Alex Koppelman is a staff writer for Salon.

Chris Brown still doesn’t get it

On Larry King, the singer proved "the cycle of violence" is hard to beat. Can his career (or his future) be saved?

  • more
    • All Share Services

Chris Brown still doesn't get itChris Brown on "Larry King Live."

CNN

Chris Brown on “Larry King Live.”

Chris Brown does not do penance well. On “Larry King Live” last night, the superstar singer, better known lately as the guy who beat up Rihanna, appeared eminently uncomfortable in his new self-appointed job of “role model.” Clad in that baby blue V-neck sweater and matching bow tie and flanked by his mother and his attorney, celebrity ambulance chaser Mark Geragos, he looked more like a Care Bear than a convicted domestic abuser.

Throughout the entire hour — a 30-second teaser of which leaked on Monday — Brown remained soft-spoken and polite, mumbling terse replies and staunchly refusing all inquiries into the specifics of what happened that night last February with Rihanna. That gambit — like his cuddly ensemble — was a clever way of assuring that America never got a glimpse of the young man who used his girlfriend’s face as a punching bag. What, after all, would be the payoff for him in saying what led up to the violence? What could he possibly say that wouldn’t sound like a “she was asking for it” rationalization?

When King asked Brown point-blank if he recalled the incidents, he flatly said, “No.” No, he does not remember shoving his girlfriend into a wall. No, he does not remember smashing a car window. But if he doesn’t know what he did, he is at least clear on how he feels. When King asked Brown, “Do you love her?” he replied, “Definitely.” King pressed on, “In love with her?” “Definitely,” he echoed. And even when King asked, “Would you spend a lifetime with her?” he hemmed and hawed a moment before stating quietly, “Yes.”

King then showed the now-infamous photo of Rihanna, her lips swollen and bloody, her face battered, putting Brown at a near loss for words. “When I look at it now, it’s just like, wow, like, I can’t — I can’t believe that — that actually happened. It’s — it just really like took a toll on me. Like, I was just like wow.”

Having never beaten anybody myself, I don’t know what the appropriate response is or how much I’d block out. But I do know this — despite his repeated insistence on taking responsibility for “the incident” and stating that “I really regret and I feel totally ashamed of what I did” — not once during the hour did the guy just come out and say it’s not cool to hit. He danced around the topic, he called it something he wishes he could take back, and he said he wants to be a role model. But the man who said, “Sometimes, in a way, you lose your temper or arguments get heated,” and that in the future he wants to handle problems “differently and better,” never came out and simply said the words that real men don’t hit women.

So it came to pass that the most illuminating moment of the hour came not from Brown but from his lawyer. After Brown’s mother tearfully acknowledged that Brown had been exposed to domestic abuse in his childhood because of her violent ex-boyfriend, Geragos said, “They talk about the cycle of violence. I’ve handled these cases or these types of cases for years. And you tend to see — it’s almost surprising. In some cases, I’ve represented three generations of people who have been charged with this crime.” A nice racket for defense attorneys, but crushingly depressing for everybody else.

There was also repeated speculation throughout the show about Brown’s career. King noted that the singer has lost endorsement deals, and Brown acknowledged he’s had to step back from his touring. But though the stigma of abuse will likely always follow him, there’s no such thing as career suicide anymore. Brown’s idol, Michael Jackson, had survived scandals and still managed to sell out 50 dates in London earlier this year on what was to be his comeback tour. And in the midst of his own drama, Brown’s exuberant 2008 hit “Forever” got a second life this summer thanks to a viral wedding dance video that pushed the song right back onto the charts.

Brown is only 20 years old. He has a full lifetime ahead of him, one that will include other relationships and very likely children of his own. That’s why as untenable as his behavior has been, I need to hope that Chris Brown, domestic abuser, will not always be Chris Brown, domestic abuser, who sat quietly as Larry King rattled off, “You punched her a number of times. You threatened to beat the blank out of her when you got home. You warned you were going to kill her. You bit her on the ear.” That guy seems to still be suffering from a big fat case of not getting it. But late in the hour, in a moment that seemed a little less guarded, he admitted, “I don’t know everything. I’m not a man fully yet. So I want to definitely be a man and learn who I am and learn how to control emotions.”

I want to believe that the next few months will make that possible. Because I have to believe, for the sake of every person who’s ever been abused and every person who’s been an abuser, that it’s possible to break that “cycle of violence.” Brown’s punishment from the court is five years’ probation. But he faces a potential sentence that stretches beyond his own lifetime and far into that of his future progeny. He’s got forever. Let’s see what he does with it. 

Continue Reading Close
Mary Elizabeth Williams

Mary Elizabeth Williams is a staff writer for Salon and the author of "Gimme Shelter: My Three Years Searching for the American Dream." Follow her on Twitter: @embeedub.

Phillip Garrido, wolf at the door

As disturbing details emerge about Jaycee Dugard's alleged captor, one question remains: Why did people trust him?

  • more
    • All Share Services

Phillip Garrido, wolf at the doorPhillip Garrido, accused in the kidnapping of Jaycee Dugard, is shown in this booking mugshot released to Reuters August 27, 2009. Dugard had been missing since she was abducted near her home in South Lake Tahoe on June 10, 1991 by two people in a gray sedan.

The story of Phillip Garrido has grown steadily darker and more disturbing from the moment a young woman was identified last week as Jaycee Lee Dugard, snatched from a South Lake Tahoe street in 1991 when she was just 11 years old.

With each new nightmarish revelation about her alleged abductor Garrido — who, along with his wife Nancy, is now charged with 29 felony counts including rape, kidnapping and false imprisonment — one chilling question keeps cropping up: Why is it so hard to recognize a demon when we see one?

Last night on “Larry King Live,” Katherine Callaway Hall, who was kidnapped and raped by Garrido in 1976, recounted her own ordeal with Garrido in harrowing detail. (See video clip below.) He eventually served 11 years for his crime. (Hall also says she believes he approached her at her work “in a threatening manner” soon after he had been paroled.)

She was 25 when he knocked on her car window at a California supermarket, claiming automobile trouble. He asked her for a ride and she obliged. She says now, “It was the worst decision I ever made.” When she pulled over, “He slammed my head against the steering wheel,” handcuffed her, led her to a mini warehouse in a desolate area and raped her repeatedly over an eight-hour period.

On “Larry King,” Hall described vividly the room where Garrido assaulted her 33 years ago – the dimensions of the space, the mattress, the stacks of boxes, the maze of hanging carpets. She spoke of the moment she heard his name on the news last week. “I started screaming, ‘Oh my God. Oh my God, it’s him.’” But when Larry King rasped, “Why did you let him in the car?” Hall could only shake her head and say, “I don’t know.”

“I don’t know.” It’s a phrase being echoed by Garrido’s neighbors in Antioch, California. How is it that they spent the past 18 years living in close proximity to a couple allegedly enslaving and raping a young girl (and fathering two children with her) and didn’t suspect anything?

Monica Adams, whose mother lives on the Garridos’ street, told San Francisco’s CBS5 that she and other neighbors knew Garrido was a sex offender and that he had children living with him, but that “He never bothered any one, he kept to himself. What would we have done? You just watch your own.” Another neighbor, Mike Rogers, told ABC about “all the partying, the different groups of people back in the back, the fires all night long,” but said he never called the cops because he didn’t want to seem paranoid.

Yet some neighbors did act on troubling signs coming from the home. In 2006, a woman called 911 to report that there appeared to be people living in the backyard and that Garrido was “a psychotic with a sex addiction.” She, however, was in the minority. Acting on the call an officer met with Garrido in his front yard and left. Contra Costa county sheriff Warren E. Rupf told reporters last week, “We should have been more inquisitive… I cannot change the course of events, but we are beating ourselves up over this and will continue to do so.”

Last night on ”Inside Edition,” Garrido’s first wife, Christine Murphy, called him a “monster.” She also, tellingly, referred to him as “a good manipulator.”

But there are no sadder, more complicated figures in this story than the three people at the heart of it — Jaycee Dugard and her two children. Dugard’s stepfather Carl Probyn told KXTV last week that, “She is very remorseful. She’s very guilty that she bonded with these people.” Much has already been written about the tormented relationships with captives and their captors. Dugard’s children reportedly cried when Garrido was arrested. Think of the hurt and confusion and pain of the people who were even briefly manipulated by the Garridos. Dugard spent more than half her life with them, and her daughters never knew anything else.

Garrido is now a suspect in a string of murders in Pittsburg, California, including a schoolgirl and eight prostitutes. Yesterday, police searching near Garrido’s home said they had found bone fragments at a neighboring property. Special Agent Carl Campion, who investigated the Dugard case from the start, said in an podcast yesterday that, ”We didn’t have anything that remotely was close to these people. These people just did not come up on the radar screen at all, for whatever reason.”

One of the many tragic aspects of Garrido story is the number of people now wondering why they didn’t recognize something terribly wrong or why they didn’t recognize it sooner, why they didn’t act differently – and what might have changed if they had. But it’s clear the youth who could calmly persuade a stranger to give him a lift, the aging man who could chat with a cop on his front lawn while Jaycee Dugard was hidden in the back was very, very good at fooling people. Maybe because people are very good at being fooled. Jeffrey Dahmer’s neighbors called him shy. Dennis Radner, aka the BTK Killer was described as low-key.

Sir Francis Bacon once observed that ”those things which strike the sense outweigh things which, although they be more important, do not strike it directly. Hence, contemplation usually ceases with seeing.” We spend so much time accepting what passes for normal that it’s easy to overlook awful even when it’s right under our noses.

Garrido and his wife have pleaded not guilty to all the charges against them.

Embedded video from CNN Video

Continue Reading Close
Mary Elizabeth Williams

Mary Elizabeth Williams is a staff writer for Salon and the author of "Gimme Shelter: My Three Years Searching for the American Dream." Follow her on Twitter: @embeedub.

Levi Johnston on “Larry King Live”

Bristol's ex talks about the impossibility of abstinence, sheep hunting and whether or not he'll see the Palins in court.

  • more
    • All Share Services

“You’re not doing interviews like this. Why?” Larry King asked Levi Johnston, Bristol Palin’s ex-fiancé and baby daddy, in the first minutes of his show Wednesday night. Perhaps Larry meant that Johnston wasn’t doing any more interviews like this. Or perhaps he meant that Johnston wasn’t doing interviews like this, wherein he sat across from a man who had recently emerged from a cryogenic chamber with a blinking map of the world in the background. But obviously, Johnston has been doing interviews, and they’ve mostly resembled this one: First on “The Tyra Banks Show,” which prompted a fierce response from Sarah Palin, who called his answers on the show “flat-out lies,” and then on the CBS’ “Early Show.” It’s true, the Johnston clan has taken a break from the media but clearly they were waiting for bigger game, and it had finally arrived: Wednesday night prime time with the big man on CNN.

For 40 minutes or so, a rather nervous Johnston talked about his crumbling relationship with the Palins and his struggles to see his 4-month-old son, Tripp. Of course, I use the term “talked” loosely, as Johnston is a 19-year-old of few words, those words being mostly “yeah,” “nope” and “I’m not sure.” And since King is known for his own strange softball line of questioning, we get these kinds of exchanges:

Larry King: When the convention hit, didn’t you say to yourself, my gosh, I’m going to get caught in this. I didn’t ask for this! I mean I love this girl — I slept with her — but I didn’t ask for this. Did you think that?

Levi Johnston: A little bit, yeah.

So what did we learn? Well, Johnston repeated his claim that Sarah Palin “probably knew” he was having sex with Bristol. He said he and Bristol never considered abortion, that the split was mutual. And when King went so far as to ask if he’d had sex in the Palin’s house, Johnston broke into an embarrassed grin and responded, “You know, Larry, I’m a gentleman, and I don’t kiss and tell. I don’t think that really matters.” Of course, earlier that day, the National Enquirer reported that Johnston was shopping a tell-all memoir to pay for legal bills, but let’s be frank: No one should have to talk to Larry King about having sex. Ever.

A short rundown of other highlights from the first half: Abstinence? Unrealistic. “I think all kids, or most of them, are sexually active.” What’s up with the ring-finger tattoo? “I was hunting, and I lost the ring she gave me. It was bad. So I figured this way I wouldn’t lose it, and it’d get me out of a bind.” What was he doing when Sarah Palin’s candidacy was announced? Sheep huntin’. “Sheep herding?” King asked, confused. Sheep huntin‘. (Yup: Those were the highlights.)

Much of the rest of the interview was devoted to talking about Levi’s plight as a father. This has been the family’s rallying cry against the Palins, that this isn’t about fame or fortune it’s about the kid, dammit. “Levi you are a symbol of father’s rights,” read one of the online comments that scrolled on the bottom of the CNN screen at the beginning of the show. Although I suspect that lonely, optimistic soul had yearned for a symbol who was a tad more articulate and forthcoming and able to answer squarely, for instance, whether or not he had a lawyer. (Johnston at first said he did not, but then, after a commercial break, admitted that he did.)

“Are you worried that saying you have a lawyer will alienate the Palins?” asked King.

Johnston shifted uncomfortably. “Uh, I don’t want to stir anything up.”

Throughout, Johnston seemed to be simply unsure what he could, or should, or was allowed to say. He seemed overwhelmed and lost. “We’re not in a fight with the Palins,” he said, althought that was followed by, “If it keeps going like this I guess we’ll have to” go to court. And then later, when a viewer asked how much he paid in child support, Levi answered, “I ain’t doing a whole lot of child support until we go to court. I got everything my boy needs back home — diapers, toys, everything, and once we go to court and deal with that, you know …”

Eventually, Johnston was joined by his sister Mercede, who once again rehashed her feud with Bristol, and his mother, Sherry, who confirmed after a bit of sidestepping that, yes, they planned to go to court to fight for child custody when they got back to Alaska. “That is the step we’re going to have to go to.”

Johnston got the special treat of hearing how CNN’s bloggers had been slogging him: “Aren’t his 15 minutes up? Levi, shame on you for going public with such private matters! This behavior does nothing to help your little boy!”

To the accusation that he is seeking fame, he simply responded, “I didn’t ask to be thrown into this. I’m just trying to get my story out there. I’m not looking to be a celebrity.” And of what became of his relationship with Bristol, he said, “She changed after the campaign. That wasn’t the Bristol I knew before she got pregnant. She’s totally different now, in a big way.”

Larry King has never been known for probing deep, but his final question was illuminating. He asked something of Levi that no one — in all the questions about Sarah Palin and unprotected sex and child custody — had thought to ask. “Levi, have you finished high school?”

Levi admitted he hadn’t graduated, that he still had to take a final test.

“You gonna do that?” King asked.

“Yeah.”

(Portions of the interview can be viewed below.)

 

Continue Reading Close

Sarah Hepola is an editor at Salon.

Screw all this, I’m marrying a flatworm

Sexual promiscuity is rampant throughout nature, much as it is in our tabloids these days.

  • more
    • All Share Services

The other day, for lack of a hairshirt to wear, I watched Larry King. “Why do men cheat?” he barked at the camera, shifting back and forth in his chair. (This was not the Larry King segment previously blogged about on Broadsheet, in which Dr. Laura blathered on about why Silda drove Eliot to sleep with prostitutes. This was another Larry King segment. Have you ever noticed that, at any given moment, there are approximately 100 percent more Larry King shows than there should be?)

Anyway, a caller buzzed in with an important question. “Yes, uh, I’d like to hear from your panel why women cheat.”

Aggh. I’m sorry, what I mean is: Agggggggggggh. I’m tired of the “why do spouses cheat” stories. It’s depressing. It’s facile. I want to throw the remote at the television. I want to shred up the papers. And yet, I cannot stop watching. I sat there, and watched the damn thing, because the truth is that I am dying to know the reason why spouses cheat, and if I could somehow divine that wisdom from a Larry King show, that would be gangbusters.

I did not divine that wisdom. I wasted 10 minutes of my life, and then switched over to that John Adams HBO special I just could not get into. (Colonial drama = aggggh.)

Anyway, in light of our obsession regarding why spouses cheat, the Times offers us this corrective from the animal kingdom:

“Sexual promiscuity is rampant throughout nature,” writes Natalie Angier, “and true faithfulness a fond fantasy.”

Well, crap. In fact, monogamy is so rare that we get this tidbit: The only 100 percent monogamous species is a flatworm called the Diplozoon paradoxum. “Males and females meet each other as adolescents, and their bodies literally fuse together, whereupon they remain faithful until death.”

So, pffft, monogamy. So, pffft, cheating spouses. These are the days I wish I were some sophisticated Galoise-smoking Frenchwomen who is SO OVER all these naive fantasies about men and women. I suspect, however, I would still mist up watching “March of the Penguins.”

Continue Reading Close

Sarah Hepola is an editor at Salon.

William F. Buckley Jr., 1925-2008

Remembrances of the National Review founder by James Michener, Jackie Robinson, Ted Koppel, Andrea Dworkin, Oliver North, Mike Wallace and other notables.

  • more
    • All Share Services

William F. Buckley Jr., 1925-2008

Mike Wallace, broadcast journalist: Cold War prescription

There were new voices being heard on the political landscape in the mid-fifties, and “Night Beat” tuned in on them … One such guest was an erudite and self-assured young man named William F. Buckley, then just emerging as the most engaging spokesman for the conservative cause. In those days as now, the overriding foreign policy concern was the aggressive designs of the Soviet Union, and I asked Buckley what steps we should take to gain the upper hand in what was still known as the Cold War:

BUCKLEY: By accepting certain goals and preparing for those goals irrespective of the cost. To list a simple program: Liberate Albania. Unification of Korea, Extirpation of Communist influence in Syria. Unification of Germany. (New York)

From “Close Encounters: Mike Wallace’s Own Story,” by Mike Wallace and Gary Paul Gates (William Morrow, 1984)

Irv Kupcinet, columnist and broadcaster: Wonderful guest

There were innumerable great arguments on the show ["Kup's Show"].

William Buckley would argue about anything with anybody. I seldom agreed with him, but he was always a wonderful guest and I’m frankly proud that we were the first to invite him on this kind of show when he was just starting his National Review. (Chicago, 1955)

From “Kup: A Man, an Era, a City,” by Irv Kupcinet with Paul Neimark (Bonus Books, 1988)

Garry Wills, journalist and author: Pleasant company

That higher bounce of a voice he saves for the telephone: “This is Bill Buckley. I read what you sent us, and love it and will run it soon. Could you come to New York and see us?” …

Luckily National Review’s first office (later abandoned), though cramped and slovenly, was air-conditioned. I waited in a little cubicle for visitors, glassed off from the one large room, with little stalls along the sides, that housed this busy small world of editors. Stuck in my bowl, I took a goldfish view of bustle in and out of stalls, stray interweavings in the middle of the room. My first impression was of youth; but that did not carry over to the man who came to pull me out of my bowl.

I was surprised, for some reason, to find him tall — less preppy-looking than his book-jacket picture had led me to expect; pleasantly disheveled and informal, despite the rich prance and neighing of his voice. Today many people who meet Buckley for the first time have seen and heard him on TV; but I knew him only, by repute, as a Wunderkind; and this tall 32-year-old seemed somehow more normal and adult than the image I had formed of him.

When we went into his office, though, he seemed a bit boyish in the company of fellow editors, each his senior by decades — James Burnham, John Chamberlain, Willmoore Kendall. Buckley sat on his desk, tucked his legs under him, and continued discussion of some policy matter. He showed a deference to others that might belie his superiority on the review’s masthead; but he showed the same deference when the conversation circled toward my chair. Buckley asked my opinion. I don’t remember what the subject was, but I fear I answered confidently. The others went through the motions, at least, of seriously considering an opinion from this stranger off the street. Those around Bill pick up his manners, acknowledging each other’s presence and giving all a hearing. It is one of the things that makes his company so pleasant. (New York, 1957)

From “Confessions of a Conservative,” by Garry Wills (Doubleday, 1979)

James Michener, novelist: Funny, delightful, outrageous

The [United States Information Service] board that [Frank] Shakespeare assembled was evaluated as “unquestionably the most effective and best-run advisory board in the nation.” … the rare skill demonstrated by its chairman, Frank Stanton …

His number two man when I came aboard was William F. Buckley, Jr., the right-wing ideologue and one of the funniest, most delightful and outrageous men in the nation. He and I were about as far apart politically as two men could be, but I held him in the warmest regard. Savagely brilliant and devastating in his witty dismissal of bores, he was one of the young men most influential in helping swing the nation far to the right, a sinful performance for which I suppose God will forgive him, for he convinced me that God was of course both a Catholic and a conservative. (Washington, D.C., late 1950s)

From “The World Is My Home: A Memoir,” by James A. Michener (Random House, 1992)

Pierre Berton, broadcaster, journalist and historian: Commitment

The strength of [CBC's] Front Page Challenge in its early years lay in its glittering array of international guests, from Eleanor Roosevelt to Mary Pickford, from Jacques Cousteau to Aleksandr Kerensky, [who] occupied the [mystery] guest’s panelist’s chair … William F. Buckley, who believed in keeping appointments, turned up at the last moment, bedraggled and unshaven, delayed by storms that forced him to change his flight schedule again and again. He had been traveling for 24 hours when he finally reached the studio, but to him a commitment was a commitment. “Bring me a six-pack of beer,” he begged. He got it, and the show went on. (Toronto, early 1960s)

From “My Times: Living With History 1947-1995,” by Pierre Berton (Doubleday Canada, 1995)

André Schiffrin, book publisher: Looking for debating points

Asked by a group at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute — a college in Troy, New York — if I would be willing to engage William F. Buckley, Jr. in a public debate. Buckley was at the height of his fame. Someone there must have thought it would be interesting to have these two Yale alumni who were at such opposite ends of the spectrum meet for the first time.

I prepared meticulously for the debate, reading Buckley’s published works and making careful note of his viewpoints and arguments, until finally I felt ready to meet them head-on. Buckley was, as always, suave and debonair. I felt more awkward, wearing a hand-me-down, unfashionable double-breasted suit. Yet when we met onstage, I noticed that he seemed strangely nervous. Presumably, losing the debate to me in front of the several hundred people in the vast RPI auditorium would have been humiliating. Accordingly, he focused on making his debating points rather than sticking to his old viewpoints. Buckley’s main argument — in Troy, New York, of all places — was that there was no poverty in the United States. I had a hard time persuading the middle-class audience that poverty was still a major factor in our collective lives. Meanwhile, all my notes were in vain, since Buckley was quick to abandon his positions whenever necessary. I tried to point out these tactics to the audience, but the debate ended in an ambiguous draw. (Early 1960s)

From “A Political Education: Coming of Age in Paris and New York,” by André Schiffrin (Melville House Publishing, 2007)

Bob Avakian, Berkeley student and later leader of Revolutionary Communist Party: Antics of distraction

It was kind of a spring thaw, a lot of things were bursting loose, a lot of intellectual and cultural ferment was going on. The Beats were breaking out — they had started up in Greenwich Village in Manhattan and had come out to North Beach in San Francisco. I remember William Buckley came to debate some liberal about the first amendment, loyalty oaths and all that kind of stuff, and Buckley started these disgusting antics to distract the audience while the liberal was talking. At the time, I was of course still strongly opposed to communism and accepted all the conventional wisdom, or “un-wisdom,” about communism and how horrible it was. (Early 1960s)

From “Ike to Mao and Beyond: My Journey from Mainstream America to Revolutionary Communist,” by Bob Avakian (Insight Press, 2005)

Tom Brokaw, broadcast journalist and author: Long balls to deep right

I met and interviewed [for an Omaha television station] Bill Buckley, who filled the role of the national conservative intellectual as a columnist and editor of the magazine he had founded, National Review. When I tried my best fastball questions on him, he was like Ted Williams in the batting cage, flicking them away to deep right field. I came away thoroughly chastened and utterly charmed. (Mid-1960s)

From “Boom! Voices of the Sixties: Personal Reflections on the ’60s and Today,” by Tom Brokaw (Random House, 2007)

Jackie Robinson, baseball player: On the defensive

I joined the national headquarters of Republicans for [Lyndon] Johnson, based in New York, and accepted speaking assignments whenever I could to tell black and white and mixed audiences how deeply I felt that [Barry] Goldwater must be overwhelmingly repudiated. It was during the [1964 presidential] Johnson-Goldwater campaign that I had one of my confrontations with the articulate, eyebrow-raising William Buckley, owner of National Review magazine and star of the controversial “Firing Line” television show.

I was booked on a television Conservatism panel which included Bill Buckley, Shelley Winters and myself. When my friends and family learned I had consented to participate, they were aghast …

I was glad to receive these warnings. I didn’t have the slightest intention of backing out, although I already had a healthy respect for Buckley’s craft as a debater. The apprehensions of my friends made me create an advance strategy which I otherwise might not have employed. I lifted it strictly out of my sports background. When you know that you are going to face a tough, tricky opponent, you don’t let him get the first lick. Jump him before he can do anything and stay on him, keeping him on the defensive. Never let up and you rattle him effectively. When the show opened up — before Buckley could get into his devastating act of using snide remarks, big words and the superior manner — I lit right into him with the charge that many influential Goldwaterites were racists. Shelley Winters piled in behind me, and Buckley scarcely got a chance to collect his considerable wit. A man who prides himself on coming out of verbal battle cool, smiling and victorious, he lost his calm, became snappish and irritated, and, when the show was over and everyone else was shaking hands, got up and strode angrily out of the studio.

From “I Never Had It Made: An Autobiography of Jackie Robinson,” by Jackie Robinson with Alfred Duckett (Ecco/HarperCollins, 1995)

Andrea Dworkin, feminist and author: Elegant, brilliant and wrong

I think it’s worth everything to say what you believe. There are always consequences, and one must be prepared to face them. In this context there is no free speech and there never will be.

I think especially of watching William Buckley, on his “Firing Line” television program in the 1960s, debate the writer James Baldwin on segregation. Buckley was elegant and brilliant and wrong; Baldwin was passionate and brilliant and wore his heart on his sleeve — he was also right. But Buckley won the debate; Baldwin lost it. I’ll never forget how much I learned from the confrontation: Be Baldwin, not Buckley.

From “Heartbreak: The Political Memoir of a Feminist Militant,” by Andrea Dworkin (Basic Books/Perseus, 2002)

Larry L. King, journalist and novelist: Sprightly verbal show

The William Buckley piece, [a profile] … in Harper’s, got me tagged as “controversial” … I had great fun researching the Buckley piece, which included interviews with such writers as Murray Kempton, James Wechsler, Michael Harrington, Irving Howe, Norman Mailer and (by telephone) my old benefactor John Kenneth Galbraith. And I enjoyed, too, the sprightly verbal show toward which Mr. Buckley is inclined. He also treated me to a scary ride up Park Avenue at rush hour, from downtown to midtown Manhattan, perched behind him on a motor scooter while I hugged him for dear life. In matters of politics and the world’s realities, however, I suppose my piece judged the conservative iconoclast as a bit blockheaded. Mr. Buckley naturally was not taken with that evaluation, and refused an ad in his own National Review which Willie Morris hoped to place there to advertise my Harper’s piece … (Late 1960s)

From “None But a Blockhead: On Being a Writer,” by Larry L. King (Viking, 1986)

Larry King, radio and television talk show host: Couldn’t escape me

Miami is a personality town, and in Miami, I was a personality. In addition to working at WIOD, where I was also the color man for the Miami Dolphins, I had a television interview show on WTYJ and a daily newspaper column — first in The Miami Herald, then in The Miami News, and finally in The Miami Beach Sun-Reporter. During the 1968 Republican convention William Buckley was in town, and I had him on the television show. He said jokingly that he was afraid to come back to Miami because he couldn’t escape me; I was everywhere he turned.

From “Larry King,” by Larry King with Emily Yoffee (Simon and Schuster, 1982)

George Leonard, magazine journalist: Conservatives were in

Fifteen senior journalists from the nation’s most influential media descending from the sky in a luxurious jetliner and being swept away to the centers of the nation’s worst ghettos — seven ghettos in seven days. This junket to the Third World culture within our own borders was cosponsored by the National Urban League and Time-Life …

We took off from Chicago around lunchtime on Saturday … Bill Buckley sat nearby at a table next to the cockpit door, typing away at his newspaper column …

Our tour ended in Washington … We had elected Newsweek editor Oz Elliott to present our “findings.” In the middle of Elliott’s summary, Bill Buckley was spirited off for a tête-à-tête with President Nixon at the White House. The conservatives were in, no fooling. (1969)

From “Walking on the Edge of the World: A Memoir of the Sixties and Beyond, by George Leonard (Houghton Mifflin, 1988)

Mary Daly, philosopher and feminist: Getting the last word

“The Church and the Second Sex” came out … My American publisher, Harper & Row, sent me on publicity tours involving live appearances on television. I was literally hurled before the TV camera with golden opportunities either to perform brilliantly or fall on my face in front of millions of viewers … I debated with William F. Buckley, Jr., on his videotaped show, “Firing Line.” Buckley attempted to discuss my book without having familiarized himself with its contents. Although he lacked the wit to cover his ignorance, he did display considerable skill in getting the last word just before each commercial break. However, after each “pause” I managed to come back with a refutation of his ill-logic. After the show, friends seated in the studio audience told me that they saw him pushing a button under his seat whenever he decided it was the opportune time for a “break.” Although I could not see this, it did not seem improbable, since the commercial seemed invariably to immediately follow his punch lines. (New York, 1969)

From “Outercourse: The Be-Dazzling Voyage,” by Mary Daly (Harper San Francisco, 1992)

Howard Zinn, radical historian: Debate

I was invited to Tufts University to debate William F. Buckley, the well-known writer-columnist-conservative. (I was offered $300, which impressed me; I was accustomed to getting nothing. I learned later that Buckley got $3,000 — but I suppressed my resentment.) The Tufts gymnasium was packed that night with thousands of students, and thousands more were turned away. Obviously, it was not my presence but the famous Buckley who was attracting them.

When we were introduced by a Tufts philosophy professor the applause seemed fairly even for both Buckley and myself. As the debate went on, however, the applause diminished for Buckley, grew louder for me. I knew this was not because I was a superior debater, but that my arguments simply made more sense to a student body that had itself decided the [Vietnam] war was wrong.

At a certain point I glanced over at Buckley, who had a reputation for debonair coolness, and I saw he was sweating. Before the question period was declared at an end, he rose and said he had to go. In a column he wrote after the debate he said how appalled he was that American students should applaud such opposition to their own government as they heard that evening. I found it curious that Buckley did not seem to understand that unsparing criticism of government is an essential element of a democratic society. (Medford, Mass., 1970)

From “You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train: A Personal History of Our Times,” by Howard Zinn (Beacon Press, 1994)

Oliver North, Army officer and Iran-Contra scandal protagonist: Poor posture, good vocabulary

Seymour Hersh, the reporter who first broke the My Lai story, came out with a book about the incident in which he suggested that war crimes were commonplace in Vietnam. After Hersh appeared on William F. Buckley’s “Firing Line,” three of us who taught at Quantico [Marine Corps University] … wrote a letter to Mr. Buckley, expressing our outrage at Hersh’s insinuations.

Not only did Buckley write back, but he invited us to appear on “Firing Line,” to discuss the issue …

We taped the show at American University in Washington. I was struck by Buckley’s posture: he slouched so badly that I thought he was about to fall off his chair. I have never been nervous about speaking in public, and the prospect of appearing on any other television show would not have bothered me. But to be interviewed by William F. Buckley was more than a little intimidating. Should I bring along a dictionary? Not having gone to Yale, I was not incontrovertibly certain that I would comprehend the copious elongated locutions he was inclined to approbate. In the end, I managed to understand most of Buckley’s vocabulary and all of his questions. (1971)

From “Under Fire: An American Story,” by Oliver L. North with William Novak (HarperCollins, 1991)

E.J. Kahn Jr., magazine journalist: Pounding a piano

I once spent a night at his Connecticut home, after a sybaritic cruise up the coast on his yacht. Didn’t get much sleep, because Pat Buckley wanted to play gin rummy, and she and I sat up till all hours, and Bill sat up just as long, pounding a piano at the other end of their living room until we called it quits. (1970s)

From “Year of Change: More About the New Yorker & Me,” by E.J. Kahn Jr. (Viking, 1988)

Barbara Frum, broadcast journalist: Gooey caramel

Buckley had come to the CBC studios in New York City to talk to me about his experiences as a delegate to the United Nations. At the end of that interview I couldn’t resist asking what he thought about the succession of pratfalls, CIA dirty tricks, and general foul-ups which had been plaguing the folks on Pennsylvania Avenue, the same folks who had appointed him to the UN mission …

Why I thought I’d get useful insight on the issue of paranoia from Bill Buckley I don’t know. Buckley is the master of the obfuscating, complexifying, convulstiforming sentence. His words and phrases are like gooey caramel; they pour over you, suffocating you till you can’t even breathe anymore — never mind remembering where you wanted to go with your next question. This time, to my amazement, he was almost brusque. He rebuffed my probes about government conspiracy, insisting with his traditional open-mindedness that the only conspiracy worth the name was of the left-wing variety.

His pique is understandable, of course. After all, the Right had been digging out the Communist Conspiracy for years, unthanked. Buckley revels in his role as the exquisite lance of the investigators. He wasn’t about to let some Canadian interviewer cast him as defender of the investigated. (1974)

From “As It Happened,” by Barbara Frum (McClelland and Stewart, 1976)

Shana Alexander, magazine journalist and news commentator: Magisterial manner

To debate Bill Buckley on the Merv Griffin program. Cecelia [Ager, her mother] sat in the front row. I’d once termed Buckley a “closet liberal,” and he’d been gunning for me since. Today’s topic was civil rights, and when I mentioned the crucial 1954 Supreme Court Brown vs. Board of Education decision, Buckley said I had my facts all wrong. His magisterial manner withered me, and I shut up for the rest of the program. But I’d been right, Cecelia said later, and had just fallen for a cheap trick the snake Buckley had picked up on the Yale debating team. I felt much better. (New York, 1976)

From “Happy Days: My Mother, My Father, My Sister & Me,” by Shana Alexander (Doubleday 1995)

Susan Mulcahy, gossip columnist: Shit-listed

“Though Page Six [of the New York Post] functioned separately from the news desk, it couldn’t escape some of the internal decisions that affected all editorial departments. Like the shit list.

The shit list — containing the names of people who were Not Our Friends …

Conservative editor and writer William F. Buckley, Jr., whose syndicated column ran in the Post, hit the shit list when he defected to the Daily News. I was told that Buckley’s name was not to be mentioned in the paper, and wasn’t, intentionally, for quite some time. In a case of guilt by matrimonial association, the name of his wife, Pat Buckley, was also stricken from the Post’s record, which made life complicated for those covering society functions. The Buckleys are one of the most social couples in New York. They attend, and she sometimes organizes, many of New York’s big galas. When one occurred, and the Buckleys were in attendance, they were not listed among the guests in the Post’s post-party coverage. (Early 1980s)

From “My Lips Are Sealed: Confessions of a Gossip Columnist,” by Susan Mulcahy (Dolphin/Doubleday, 1988)

Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., historian and author: Old gladiator in genial decline

Bill Buckley and I appeared on “The Charlie Rose Show” [in 1995]. Our performances must have disappointed all those who looked forward to a slam-bang, no-holds-barred fight. Indeed, as I saw the show myself (it was taped at 6 P.M. and shown at 11), I thought that here were a couple of old gladiators who in their genial decline were substituting jollity for combat.

Thirty years ago Bill Buckley and I went on occasion from city to city like a couple of professional wrestlers. We really disliked each other then, and no holds were barred. Once, out of my own sense of mischief, I entered a National Review contest of some sort and won a prize. Buckley, out of his bolder sense of mischief, awarded me a live donkey, which lived in our backyard on Irving Street for a couple of days until I hired someone to take it away. Our relationship in those times was one of incessant — and heartfelt — reciprocal insult.

Then I came to New York. I liked Pat Buckley. Bill liked Alexandra. [A mutual friend] took it on as his mission to bring us together. Bill’s views moderated; today he would no longer defend Joe McCarthy, as he did 40 years ago. My attitudes mellowed with age. I developed a regard for Bill’s wit, his passion for the harpsichord, his human decency, even for his compulsion to épater the liberals (which is about all that remains from the wrathful conservatism of his youth). So now we are friends — and go easy on each other.

From “Journals 1952-2000,” by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. (Penguin Press, 2007)

Ted Koppel, broadcast journalist: Renaissance man

I spent the afternoon in New York watching William F. Buckley Jr. record the last two episodes of his interview program, “Firing Line.” Then he and I sat together and recorded this evening’s “Nightline.” We had pulled together a setup piece that was largely a celebration of Bill’s 33 years on the air, interwoven with a scanty profile that gives a limited sense of his extraordinary background. He had hosted his own television program longer than any other person has hosted a program.

Buckley, however, is one of the very few people of our time whom it is fair to describe as a Renaissance Man — gifted pianist, prolific author of both fiction and nonfiction, world-class sailor who developed his own method of celestial navigation. Most of all, though, Bill will be remembered as the popularizer of modern American conservatism. He has done this largely through his newspaper columns, the conservative journal, National Review, that he created and, of course, the television program …

He could be mean, dismissive and cantankerous, but he is too prodigiously bright and researched his opponents so carefully that he was rarely defeated in debate. Indeed, it can be fairly said that Buckley helped make conservatism part of the American political mainstream. (New York, 1999)

From “Off Camera: Private Thoughts Made Public,” by Ted Koppel (Alfred A. Knopf, 2000)

Continue Reading Close

Page 2 of 5 in Larry King