Posted on 02/07/2006 5:38:39 PM PST by oblomov
At View from the Right, Lawrence Auster observes that “Patrick Buchanan comes out 100 percent against the European papers that published the cartoons of Muhammad, seeing the act as an anti-religious provocation by secular modernists.” Auster notes that Buchanan’s piece was published by “the anarchist libertarian website lewrockwell.com.”
This is not to say that the website endorses Buchanan’s view, but it’s important to note that lewrockwell.com is highly selective about content, usually posting perspectives—and people—that comport with its mission. “Patrick J. Buchanan on tweaking the Muslims” is how the column was billed on the site, clearly saddling the “tweakers” with the blame.
Libertarians are supposed to be committed to absolute freedom of speech on private property: newspapers. In fact, some libertarians will even defend speech that incites murder, which is a far more congruent position than countenancing the aggressive, murderous, uncivilized assailants of innocent Danes.
Auster, who obviously doesn’t expect much from libertarians, told me he thinks the incongruity is a further example of a phenomenon he’s long noted on the activist Left: “the various left factions—feminists, blacks, labor, homosexualists—will quickly give up their supposed ideals for some other, overriding purpose that they all have in common. What is that overriding purpose? The destruction of the West. Once people are motivated primarily by resentment and hate, all the positions are only taken because they advance that agenda of resentment.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.ilanamercer.com ...
I'm sure all the Buchanan fans will come defend him now, and I await their rationalizations.
Funny how Paddy never found it in his heart to be critical of the blood libel cartoons published in Islamic countries showing Jews drinking Palestinia's blood. Ah but I suppose for a Paddy that is different since it is just the Jews being insulted and slandered
To impute all Libertarians because of this post is beyond stupid.
Pat never met a Jew hater he didn't love.
As for Lew Crockwell, he is just as kooky as old Pat. No surprise these two mentally unstable people would be joining up.
Buchanan is an authoritarian, not a libertarian. It therefore doesn't surprise me that he comes out against freedom of the press. And his dad, I understand, admired the Nazis.
They won't defend him. They'll just attack anyone who isn't worshiping him.
I have yet to hear a single libertarian seriously say that these cartoons should never have been printed. They cannot say it and stay consistant with the Non-initiaion Principle.
Yes, and all the Pat haters have already showed up.
Sad that a phrase like "America First", drives the Pat haters crazy.
Ilana Mercer is a self-described classical liberal. I doubt she would tar all libertarians with the same brush.
Rockwell is a "libertarian" the same way Bush is a "conservative". Don't confuse either for the "real" thing.
Hey Pat, head off to Iran to enjoy theocracy there. They hate Jews too, so you should be happy, you stupid SOB.
I think not. I said Lew Crockwell is the kook.
And don't try to turn this into a Bush bashing thread.
Interesting comments. The republican party has also sold out its conservative ideals for political gain. There are few choices left for real conservatives to turn to.
He's a smart idiot. That's why it's so disappointing. Kind of the same feeling I have toward Hitchens--another smart idiot.
I've never ceased to be amazed watching the subliminals attempt to impugne folks becase a third party made a statement that most folks would clearly find objectionable.
Your comment thus, say volumes about yourself, and very little about anyone else.
As a defender of Pat on many occassions on this forum, most prior to the 2000 election, I find it objectionable that he might infer gulit on the publishers rather than the lower life forms who have turned to violence in response.
I will have to say though, the quotes are sparse here. It would be interesting to see Buchanan's full statements before skewering him. At that point we could point out mitigating comments or give him the full treatment based on fact and not some giddy school-kid's level of commentary.
Whatever troll boy.
Being illustrative before the LP bashing starts. Making a point before it gets lost in the flames.
Let's face it, Pat needs medication.
Pat isn't an alternative. Same way McCain isn't.
If anybody here doesn't think Pat is right about the motives of the European secular press vis a vis religion, they are dreaming.
As much as I despise islamofascists, I think Pat is making a case that the cartoons weren't helpful in what we are attempting in the Middle East.
I can't speak for Pat but the Islamic reaction is indeed evidence that Bush is 100% correct in prosecuting a war on the islamowhackjobs. There we would probably disagree.
You gotta admit he's left enough "tracks" to where he's real easy skewering material. He hasn't got much left in his 'credibility account'.
Is this what freedom of the press is all about – the freedom to insult the faith of a billion people and start a religious war?
Pat Buchanan is a rusty tool.
Who's more stupid? The guy drawing the cartoon or the thousands burning and rioting over it?
You're misrepesenting Buchanans position. He doesn't question their right to publish he questions their motive and intelligence for doing so. He may be right, he may be wrong but he sure the hell isn't running afoul of libertarian ideology.
There's always The Constitution Party of the Reform Party.
Don't conflate stupidity and evil, they are not synonomous.
Pat's hatred for Jews dominates nearly every one of his political stances (and his thought process in general), so his siding with the Islamists is certainly no surprise. (He voiced support last week for U.S. taxpayers funding Hamas. ....interesting postion for an isolationist). He's an angry, obsessed, envious, bitter fool.
YEAH! 1% here we come.
Not all of them; I just got here.
You yourself say there's not enough to comment on in Pat's comments, yet you've managed to post here to insult me.
Your comment thus, sayS volumes about yourself, and very little about anyone else.
That would be par for the course. The herd mentality is strong with some people Obi wan.
"Sticks and stones"... Point out where they are wrong, but let 'em do it.
The folks who helped give us Billy Clinton, and then in the 2000 election helped the Gore cause with appearances on TV saying there's no way Pat got certain votes in Florida, never fail to meet our low expectations of them.
Regardless of what you may think about any of his other writings, you will find this one to be pretty far off base.
While I myself have a bit of a contrarian streak, I know the difference between spewing garbage merely to be provocative, and arguing for something that goes against the conventional way of thinking when there is real merit behind the arguments that I am advancing. It's hard to view Buchanan’s article as being anything other than the former...
They're predictable. The Buchanan Brigades always flood these threads to try and protect their god. They can't realize that he has become nothing but a kook in the eyes of just about everyone.
You condemn Buchanan wrongly for advocating censorhip and then advocate criminalizing his speeech.
The sticks and stones are flying from your hand.
Perhaps you should read the article by Buchanan before flinging them willy nilly?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/buchanan/buchanan36.html
"... We have "speech codes" in colleges and "hate crimes" laws to protect minorities from abusive remarks. But newspapers that hail these codes throw a blanket of "artistic freedom" over scatological art that degrades religious symbols"
Thus, Pat supports speech codes when it comes to religion.
Ever hear of free speech, you buffoon? It's not about protecting the right to say NICE things. Idiot.
Go read the column and you will see Pat's "logic"--the newspapers are to blame for the Muslims who burn buildings and call for another Holocaust. Though of course Pat doesn't mention THAT part.
What a tool!
As an anti-Buchananite I hesitate not one whit in calling your assertion here bullsh6t.
Pat is an Islamist Firster NOT an American Firster.
Buchanan's own words hang him. I'm assuming you can read--check the article.
Deny and call names all you like, but next time offer some evidence or discussion instead of childish namecalling.
We'll just let that quote from his article speak for itself.
And BTW, I can read and comprehend at levels you have never attained. That is obvious from your stupid reading of the article and my fair one.
Whined the Buchananoid.
I never whined. All you can do is screech like a child.
I quoted Buchanan's words. Let the others judge them for themselves. Your inability to even argue the points and your need to insult and insist how smart you are (it sure isn't obvious from this silliness you're writing--not once talking about the actual comments) show you to be a true-blue Buchanoid.
The first sign, of course, being your denial of such.
Now go suck your thumb and sob about how the Republican party has left behind the Buchanan Brigades and we're all communists. WHAAAAAA!!!!!
"We have "speech codes" in colleges and "hate crimes" laws to protect minorities from abusive remarks. But newspapers that hail these codes throw a blanket of "artistic freedom" over scatological art that degrades religious symbols – from putting a figure of Christ in a jar of urine to a "painting" of the Virgin Mary surrounded by female genitalia and elephant dung that hung in a Brooklyn museum."
Buchanan is simply pointing out the hyocrisy of those who support speech codes, not advocating for them. I don't like Pats politics but he is very honest about where he is coming from. You, on the other hand, argue like a leftist quoting out of context and asserting bs.
I never claimed I was "smart" just smarter than you and belive me that's not bragging.
Buchananite? LOL, you are dense wolfman.
Teh cartoons were not helpful, but it is unrealistic to expect the press will always be helpful. Thus, the comment is largely irrelevant. The West has a free press, that the governments cannot and should not control, a press which often offends, and the sooner the Muslims understand that, and get over it, the better. Western goverments should be saying the above in no uncertain terms, ie, that they cannot, and will not, muzzle the press, and that is as fundamental value to the West as any the Muslims might hold, and that Muslims should expect more such offending instances in the future.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.