The Anti-Reagan

Real Clear Politics ^ | June 9, 2009 | Pitchfork Pat Buchanan

[guitarist]

June 9, 2009 The Anti-Reagan By Patrick Buchanan

Despite his boldness, Barack Obama seems as fated to fail as were Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter. And for the same reason: a belief in his own righteousness and moral superiority, and a belief that his ideals and his persona count mightily in the modern world...

[guitarist]

It's impossible to agree with Pat all the time, as he's all over the map. But he nailed this one. The first paragraph is perfect.

[exist]

He’s more like the anti-christ.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

[Wiseghy]

The entire article is oracle-like, and likely prophetic of the obama legacy.

Pat seems crazier everytime I see him on TV, but his writing seems to be getting better and better. He is becoming something like what journalists, rather than just a commentator, should be here.

His drawing on history here is dead on accurate.

[kellynla]

BTTT

[advance_copy]

Excellent article, and one that affords us the opportunity to explain to Mr. Buchanan something that he heard and rejected in 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007.

"Our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations may she always be in the right; but right or wrong, our country!"

-- Commadore Stephen Decatur, United States Navy

After years of berating "American empire", deriding "neo-cons", attempting to undermine support for the mission of our troops in battle, Buchanan laments the very thing which he helped bring about, the Presidency of Barak Hussein Obama.

For any good it would do, were Mr. Buchanan or any of his supporters to read this post, I say to you again. The time to oppose war is before it begins. When war starts, your country is in a fight. You get on your country's side in that war, even if you didn't agree with it beginning.

In a way we are lucky. The worst result brought about by the rantings of anti-war opinionists like Buchanan is such a horrible President as the one we have now. Make no mistake, Obama is President because of wrong-headed opposition to the war in Iraq after it started. But it could have been an even worse disaster.

Once again for emphasis. It is perfectly honorable to oppose a war before it starts. Leart this lesson. It never does any good for your country to oppose victory after a war starts.

[randomhero97]

When war starts, your country is in a fight. You get on your country's side in that war, even if you didn't agree with it beginning.

Disagree. There is no way I would go to war for this administration. Whatever "war" they get us in it's more than likely for the wrong side.

If it comes down to actually protecting the Republic and the freedoms then I will pick up a rifle again. No more going to war for politics.

[jonrick46]

I find Zer0 and his cohorts engaged in “Helter Skelter.” Like the Family of Charles Manson, the Zer0 gang can say with one unified voice, “I’m the devil, and I’m here to do the devil’s business.”

They will murder America's wealth production system under the guise of saving the economy. All the while they will say, “I can't dislike you, but I will say this to you: you haven't got long before you are all going to kill yourselves, because you are all crazy. And you can project it back at me ... but I am only what lives inside each and every one of you.”—Charles Manson.

[Gator113]

This is two in a row.

Either his meds are working..... or mine are not. ;>)

[budwiesest]

I doubt anti-war opinionists like Buchanan are the greatest bump in the road to victory in the M.E. It may lie somewhere in the ability of a president to gin-up support for a war. It's really the job for a first-rate salesman. Bush couldn't sell a used car to Kirby vacuum owner.

"It's a religion of peace." Talk about mixed signals. These bastards breed a class of 'haters' unlike any known to man- willing to do whatever it takes to kill infidels, even if it involves suicide- and we're supposed to believe they can even define 'peace'? No, you won't win hearts and minds if you're sending conflicting messages to the people you need to support a war.

And, you don't go to war unless some son of a bitch needs serious killing. If you can't reason with them, shoot 'em. That goes equally for burglars, rapists, and anyone else bent on wrecking your life.

The next president (who'll have to undo the mess Obozo causes) will need to get 'real' with the American people. The luxury of bullshi**ing is no more. And, he/she will have to level with the Sand People Who Live Atop Oil: "Look boys, the oil is nice, but your attitude stinks. I'm taking out N. Korea next week, keep it up and maybe I can pencil you in."

See, the Left (pacifists/pussies) don't want to see the world as it is, but what it 'could be'. A real President 'presides' over what's real and gets everyone on-board, including MSNBC and the NY Times, so that when we partake to kill these dirty bastards there is no debate. United we stand, divided we fall.

The next Twin Towers event will be just such a wake-up call. The smart muslims will be heading for the exits. As will just about anyone with a hard-on for bringing this country down. Good. That's how it should be. Some things are open for debate, survival isn't one of them. Watching Katie Couric and Jane Fonda with luggage and passports in hand headed to another country could bring tears to my eyes, but then, so does chopping onions.

Freedom, and the freedom to criticize our country isn't what will bring us down. Laziness and a lack of spine in our 'leaders' will. Well, we've got the lazy thing down pretty good and with this spineless, apologist, sad excuse of a president, the future's not looking so good. If this cad weren't an empty suit, my glass wouldn't be half-empty.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

"As for Barack, he behaves on the world stage like some Ivy League kid ashamed of the people he came from, letting one and all on campus know that he is nothing like his benighted family with its sordid history. "

He doesn't want to be "bitter" clinging to guns and religion.