Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remember Buchanan's convention speech in Houston?

Posted on 07/12/2004 7:52:29 AM PDT by 1Old Pro

I clearly recall Buchanan's speech at the Houston GOP convention having watched it live and recoreded it on tape for future review.

I listened to it at least 3 times. This was when Pat was still a Republican and before he went off the deep end.

Personally, I thought this was one of the greatest speeched ever given at a convention. The media went NUTS. They talked about His hate filled, mean spirited speech for MONTHS on every single TV show and in every article written on the convention.

This year our convention will be full of moderates and boring speeches. Would you prefer conservative speeches that speak to many of our values AND the months of media criticism and labeling of the GOP as hateful? I would. Reagan spread the conservative word and I think the GOP of the 21st century should do the same and stop trying to run from our values.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: patbuchanan; rncconvention
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-223 next last
To: Dems_R_Losers

It was NOT a great speech. I was there and watched the whole convention. I have never seen a more dispirited group of people as there were leaving the hall that night. Every one of us knew that Bush was going to lose at that point, and we knew that Buchanan's speech would get hung around Bush's neck like a stone.>>>>

It was a great speech and Bush might have been re-elected if he had embraced it instead of dissing it.

In the election Bush came off as being insensitive to the plight of the working person. It came to a head when he glaced at his watch during that one debate. That action cost Bush the election.


81 posted on 07/12/2004 9:09:14 AM PDT by jmeagan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook
" There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself. And in that struggle for the soul of America, Clinton & Clinton are on the other side, and George Bush is on our side."

That was over the top extremism. I'm not at war with any other loyal Americans, regardless of their religious or cultural beliefs. Al Qaeda showed us what a religious war is, and it isn't about disagreeing over whether an actress should have a baby not of wedlock.

Lets hope that no other nation ever shows Buchanan the difference between a growing dependence on foreign laborers and a real invasion.

82 posted on 07/12/2004 9:15:21 AM PDT by bayourod (Kerry, the human downer, knows the words to "optimism" but can't quite get the tune right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro
PJB's speech text:

"Well, we took the long way home, but we finally got here.

And I want to congratulate President Bush, and remove any doubt about where we stand: The primaries are over, the heart is strong again, and the Buchanan brigades are enlisted--all the way to a great comeback victory in November.

Like many of you last month, I watched that giant masquerade ball at Madison Square Garden--where 20,000 radicals and liberals came dressed up as moderates and centrists--in the greatest single exhibition of cross-dressing in American political history.

One by one, the prophets of doom appeared at the podium. The Reagan decade, they moaned, was a terrible time in America; and the only way to prevent even worse times, they said, is to entrust our nation's fate and future to the party that gave us McGovern, Mondale, Carter and Michael Dukakis.

No way, my friends. The American people are not going to buy back into the failed liberalism of the 1960s and '70s--no matter how slick the package in 1992.

The malcontents of Madison Square Garden notwithstanding, the 1980s were not terrible years. They were great years. You know it. I know it. And the only people who don't know it are the carping critics who sat on the sidelines of history, jeering at ine of the great statesmen of modern time.

Out of Jimmy Carter's days of malaise, Ronald Reagan crafted the longest peacetime recovery in US history--3 million new businesses created, and 20 million new jobs.

Under the Reagan Doctrine, one by one, the communist dominos began to fall. First, Grenada was liberated, by US troops. Then, the Red Army was run out of Afghanistan, by US weapons. In Nicaragua, the Marxist regime was forced to hold free elections--by Ronald Reagan's contra army--and the communists were thrown out of power.

Have they forgotten? It was under our party that the Berlin Wall came down, and Europe was reunited. It was under our party that the Soviet Empire collapsed, and the captive nations broke free.

It is said that each president will be recalled by posterity--with but a single sentence. George Washington was the father of our country. Abraham Lincoln preserved the Union. And Ronald Reagan won the Cold War. And it is time my old colleagues, the columnists and commentators, looking down on us tonight from their anchor booths and sky boxes, gave Ronald Reagan the credit he deserves--for leading America to victory in the Cold War.

Most of all, Ronald Reagan made us proud to be Americans again. We never felt better about our country; and we never stood taller in the eyes of the world.

But we are here, not only to celebrate, but to nominate. And an American president has many, many roles.

He is our first diplomat, the architect of American foreign policy. And which of these two men is more qualified for that role? George Bush has been UN ambassador, CIA director, envoy to China. As vice president, he co-authored the policies that won the Cold War. As president, George Bush presided over the liberation of Eastern Europe and the termination of the Warsaw Pact. And Mr. Clinton? Well, Bill Clinton couldn't find 150 words to discuss foreign policy in an acceptance speech that lasted an hour. As was said of an earlier Democratic candidate, Bill Clinton's foreign policy experience is pretty much confined to having had breakfast once at the Intl. House of Pancakes.

The presidency is also America's bully pulpit, what Mr Truman called, "preeminently a place of moral leadership." George Bush is a defender of right-to-life, and lifelong champion of the Judeo-Christian values and beliefs upon which this nation was built.

Mr Clinton, however, has a different agenda.

At its top is unrestricted abortion on demand. When the Irish-Catholic governor of Pennsylvania, Robert Casey, asked to say a few words on behalf of the 25 million unborn children destroyed since Roe v Wade, he was told there was no place for him at the podium of Bill Clinton's convention, no room at the inn.

Yet a militant leader of the homosexual rights movement could rise at that convention and exult: "Bill Clinton and Al Gore represent the most pro-lesbian and pro-gay ticket in history." And so they do.

Bill Clinton supports school choice--but only for state-run schools. Parents who send their children to Christian schools, or Catholic schools, need not apply.

Elect me, and you get two for the price of one, Mr Clinton says of his lawyer-spouse. And what does Hillary believe? Well, Hillary believes that 12-year-olds should have a right to sue their parents, and she has compared marriage as an institution to slavery--and life on an Indian reservation.

Well, speak for yourself, Hillary.

Friends, this is radical feminism. The agenda Clinton & Clinton would impose on America--abortion on demand, a litmus test for the Supreme Court, homosexual rights, discrimination against religious schools, women in combat--that's change, all right. But it is not the kind of change America wants. It is not the kind of change America needs. And it is not the kind of change we can tolerate in a nation that we still call God's country.

A president is also commander in chief, the man we empower to send sons and brothers, fathers and friends, to war.

George Bush was 17 when they bombed Pearl Harbor. He left his high school class, walked down to the recruiting office, and signed up to become the youngest fighter pilot in the Pacific war. And Mr Clinton? When Bill Clinton's turn came in Vietnam, he sat up in a dormitory in Oxford, England, and figured out how to dodge the draft.

Which of these two men has won the moral authority to call on Americans to put their lives at risk? I suggest, respectfully, it is the patriot and war hero, Navy Lieutenant J. G. George Herbert Walker Bush.

My friends, this campaign is about philosophy, and it is about character; and George Bush wins on both counts--going away; and it is time all of us came home and stood beside him.

As running mate, Mr Clinton chose Albert Gore. And just how moderate is Prince Albert? Well, according to the Taxpayers Union, Al Gore beat out Teddy Kennedy, two straight years, for the title of biggest spender in the Senate.

And Teddy Kennedy isn't moderate about anything.

In New York, Mr Gore made a startling declaration. Henceforth, he said, the "central organizing principle" of all governments must be: the environment.

Wrong, Albert!

The central organizing principle of this republic is freedom. And from the ancient forests of Oregon, to the Inland Empire of California, America's great middle class has got to start standing up to the environmental extremists who put insects, rats and birds ahead of families, workers and jobs.

One year ago, my friends, I could not have dreamt I would be here. I was then still just one of many panelists on what President Bush calls "those crazy Sunday talk shows."

But I disagreed with the president; and so we challenged the president in the Republican primaries and fought as best we could. From February to June, he won 33 primaries. I can't recall exactly how many we won.

But tonight I want to talk to the 3 million Americans who voted for me. I will never forget you, nor the great honor you have done me. But I do believe, deep in my heart, that the right place for us to be now--in this presidential campaign--is right beside George Bush. The party is our home; this party is where we belong. And don't let anyone tell you any different.

Yes, we disagreed with President Bush, but we stand with him for freedom to choice religious schools, and we stand with him against the amoral idea that gay and lesbian couples should have the same standing in law as married men and women.

We stand with President Bush for right-to-life, and for voluntary prayer in the public schools, and against putting American women in combat. And we stand with President Bush in favor of the right of small towns and communities to control the raw sewage of pornography that pollutes our popular culture.

We stand with President Bush in favor of federal judges who interpret the law as written, and against Supreme Court justices who think they have a mandate to rewrite our Constitution.

My friends, this election is about much more than who gets what. It is about who we are. It is about what we believe. It is about what we stand for as Americans. There is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself. And in that struggle for the soul of America, Clinton & Clinton are on the other side, and George Bush is on our side. And so, we have to come home, and stand beside him.

My friends, in those 6 months, from Concord to California, I came to know our country better than ever before in my life, and I collected memories that will be with me always.

There was that day long ride through the great state of Georgia in a bus Vice President Bush himself had used in 1988--a bus they called Asphalt One. The ride ended with a 9:00 PM speech in front of a magnificent southern mansion, in a town called Fitzgerald.

There were the workers at the James River Paper Mill, in the frozen North Country of New Hampshire--hard, tough men, one of whom was silent, until I shook his hand. Then he looked up in my eyes and said, "Save our jobs!" There was the legal secretary at the Manchester airport on Christmas Day who told me she was going to vote for me, then broke down crying, saying, "I've lost my job, I don't have any money; they've going to take away my daughter. What am I going to do?"

My friends, even in tough times, these people are with us. They don't read Adam Smith or Edmund Burke, but they came from the same schoolyards and playgrounds and towns as we did. They share our beliefs and convictions, our hopes and our dreams. They are the conservatives of the heart.

They are our people. And we need to reconnect with them. We need to let them know we know they're hurting. They don't expect miracles, but they need to know we care.

There were the people of Hayfork, the tiny town high up in California's Trinity Alps, a town that is now under a sentence of death because a federal judge has set aside 9 million acres for the habitat of the spotted owl--forgetting about the habitat of the men and women who live and work in Hay fork. And there were the brave people of Koreatown who took the worst of the LA riots, but still live the family values we treasure, and who still believe deeply in the American dream.

Friends, in those wonderful 25 weeks, the saddest days were the days of the bloody riot in LA, the worst in our history. But even out of that awful tragedy can come a message of hope.

Hours after the violence ended I visited the Army compound in south LA, where an officer of the 18th Cavalry, that had come to rescue the city, introduced me to two of his troopers. They could not have been 20 years old. He told them to recount their story.

They had come into LA late on the 2nd day, and they walked up a dark street, where the mob had looted and burned every building but one, a convalescent home for the aged. The mob was heading in, to ransack and loot the apartments of the terrified old men and women. When the troopers arrived, M-16s at the ready, the mob threatened and cursed, but the mob retreated. It had met the one thing that could stop it: force, rooted in justice, backed by courage.

Greater love than this hath no man than that he lay down his life for his friend. Here were 19-year-old boys ready to lay down their lives to stop a mob from molesting old people they did not even know. And as they took back the streets of LA, block by block, so we must take back our cities, and take back our culture, and take back our country.

God bless you, and God bless America."

83 posted on 07/12/2004 9:15:27 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snarkytart

Bush lost for two reasons:"READ MY LIPS" and ROSS PEROT.


84 posted on 07/12/2004 9:17:36 AM PDT by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Badeye
Buchanan went off the deep end that night, not later. And we got 8 years of Clinton due in no small part to PJB's megalomania.

If you think the substance of Buchanan's speech that night constituted someone going "off the deep end", one wonders why you would be opposed to Clinton's election at all. The speech was a rock-solid conservative argument for re-electing Bush.

85 posted on 07/12/2004 9:36:26 AM PDT by Junior_G
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro

I think you make a mistake. I expect Zell Miller, Ahnuuuuld, and the like to make great passionate speechs against the LEFT. Let's give them a chance. The difference is that if TOM DELAY or NEWT GINGRICH gave these speeches, noone would listen. But if the "moderates" give them, people could be swayed. Let's see what happens. The bottom line is, BUSH MUST WIN.


86 posted on 07/12/2004 9:40:09 AM PDT by Keith (IT"S ABOUT THE JUDGES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmeagan

At least one (and she claimed there were more) GOP delegate to the 1992 convention told me that she left the GOP right after Pat's speech. She said that Pat's speech basically showed that the GOP was anti-semetic and that overrode the economic value of supporting them. I also know many Jews with conservative values (on social and economic issues) who will never GOP because of their belief that Republicans are anti-semetic.


87 posted on 07/12/2004 10:02:49 AM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

Comment #88 Removed by Moderator

To: Dems_R_Losers
It was a nasty screed that basically said "I'm still right and all of you who didn't vote for me are un-American idiots." It was the most obnoxious speech I have ever heard.

This is the most deluded assessment of the speech that I've seen yet. The full text of the speech is posted earlier in this thread for all to see; and it most certainly does not carry the tone that you ascribe to it.

89 posted on 07/12/2004 10:04:42 AM PDT by Junior_G
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: cajungirl
I just remember hating it, feeling somewhat revolted by it and not liking Buchanan. I still don't like Buchanan. No reason to explain or argue, just don't like the man.

Best argument I've seen yet for why this speech was so horrible.

90 posted on 07/12/2004 10:08:51 AM PDT by Junior_G
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Junior_G

Buchanan could recite the constitution and his tone, his manner, his pompous self, the edge of hate in his voice would make it a bad speech. And those upthread who are saying if one didn't like the speech, one was ignorant, just like "vermin" in the dem party, stupid, etc make my point. That is the kind of talk I expect from Buchanan and his pitchfork mobs. I don't like the man. I don't like the black white posture of people on this thread. And I don't like anyone being called "vermin",,reeks of dehumanizing people and we know where that leads.


91 posted on 07/12/2004 10:16:12 AM PDT by cajungirl (wi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: bayourod
...it isn't about disagreeing over whether an actress should have a baby not of wedlock.

Then maybe he shouldn't have let Dan Quayle speak either.

92 posted on 07/12/2004 10:25:08 AM PDT by Rightwing Conspiratr1 (Lock-n-load!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Badeye

agree w/72


93 posted on 07/12/2004 10:37:29 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Keith
The bottom line is, BUSH MUST WIN.

No question, I agree.

94 posted on 07/12/2004 10:40:06 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Guiliani and Zell Miller, boring? And Rod Paige who criticized the teacher unions, a moderate? I disagree.

I agree with Rudy, not because he is a moderate but because he is paasonate and he is Rudy. Zell is great, but we'll see how he is as a speaker. Pataki is a big yawn. A numebr of prominent conservative writers have recently made the case that the convention is highlighting moderates. What we need are conservatives who are great speakers IMHO.

95 posted on 07/12/2004 10:43:23 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
FWIW,the last 12 years in this country utterly vindicated Pat Buchanan.

So true!!!

I also agree with your recollection of how things happened. I recall the torrent of accolades and genuine appreciation of his powerful speech by every single person commenting that night. And,in fact the pundits and commentators saturated the television and radio audiences with remark after remark attesting to the power and incisiveness of that speech.

I was thrilled and thought it the perfect example of the power of truth. And while I was filled with great hope that things would start turning,those people behind the scenes,the controllers must have recognized the same things. But rather than looking at it as a cause for great hope for the world,they saw it as a great threat to their dreams to rule the world and they were filled with fear. So they gathered their forces who were sprinkled liberally in the media,academia and government and the rest if history.IMO.

96 posted on 07/12/2004 10:47:01 AM PDT by saradippity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: zarf
Funny, I saw the same speech and I quit the Republican party.

My cubicle-mate at work is a Democrat who claims she voted for Reagan twice, but could never vote Republican again after that speech and convention. She doesn't remember who gave the speech, but does remember that she felt "frightened" because Republicans wanted to take away the right to abortion.

Personally, I rather doubt she ever voted for Reagan. But my point in relating this anecdote is that even after all this time, that convention and speech are remembered as incredibly divisive. Those who admire Pat Buchanan love the speech. Pretty much everyone else was either embarrassed by it or frightened by it.

But these are far different times. No matter what, we simply cannot let Kerry-Edwards near the levers of power. Anyone who doesn't get that is either monumentally stupid or has a death wish.

 


My tagline until the election:
A vote for Kerry-Edwards is a vote for Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Jacques Chirac, the UN, International Criminal Court, and Hollyweirdos.
Failure to vote, or a vote for a minority party, is a vote for Kerry-Edwards (unless you’re a liberal/Leftist who’ll vote Nader, a minority party, or stay home).

97 posted on 07/12/2004 10:49:47 AM PDT by Wolfstar (Get off your duffs and VOTE for Bush-Cheney in Nov. Your life may depend on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: votelife
"the fact that this speech seems relatively mainstream to me says I'm either a hate filled extremist, or my views are pretty normal. "

Now it sure is better to read Pat's actual speech rather than the Goebbel's slant put on by reviewers.

98 posted on 07/12/2004 10:56:39 AM PDT by ex-snook ("Above all Things Truth Beareth Away the Victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
Care to explain why the Buchanan speech made you quit the party. That seems a little extreme, considering it was the speech of a man who had been beaten like a gong in the primaries. It's not like he was representing the main-stream Republican voice. He was representing his 5% of primary voters.

I did not appreciate the "culture wars" militancy. His trashing of gays, eliminated any chance of trying to grow the party to greater inclusiveness.

His use of the LA riots was, IMHO, race baiting.

One of the great things about the Republican Party is the respect and tolerance it has for strong religious beliefs and the legitimacy of religious belief in influencing political discourse.

The problem is to balance that while opening the door to other groups who have the same respect yet have differing political opinions that may challenge religious orthodoxy.

Politics is not black and white, it's about openness and debate and compromise - Pat's speech was non of those things. It was an alienating rant that shut the door on the Republican party growing itself to creating a bigger conservative tent.

99 posted on 07/12/2004 11:14:01 AM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Dems_R_Losers
Pat Buchanan gave us eight years of Bill Clinton.

Pat Buchanan gave us 8 years of Clinton . . .

Perot gave us 8 years of Clinton . . .

I'm tired of hearing this bunk. The Republican party gave us 8 years of Clinton by fielding two candidates that failed to energize the party's base. You cannot win an election without your base.

100 posted on 07/12/2004 11:18:27 AM PDT by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-223 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson