Jesus Christ: You can't impeach Him and He ain't gonna resign.
Posted on 01/29/2016 6:23:27 PM PST by lqcincinnatus
“Butch” was the first thing my wife said upon seeing that hairstyle especially in combination with Megyn’s facial features — meaning appearance, not persuasion.
Well, excuuuuuuuuse me! Paleowhateverism is the “only true conservatism” OF 1935!!!! The rest of us have moved on.
Moved on to open-borders .. that’s working out very well , isn’t it ?
And doesn’t he claim $10 BILLION or more? Don’t get me wrong. If The Donald wanted to establish and award a $ 1 MILLION annual prize for FReeper of the Year, I would probably humbly accept and make do, after a generous contribution to JimRob and FR which would be only right.
Jeb!? is that you ?
Kick Ass foreign policy based on military power second to none and soooooo far ahead of whatever comes second that we will never be attacked again;
Avoiding atrocities like the surrendermonkey Iran Deal.;
Avoiding ANYTHING smacking of the surrendermonkeyism for which Neville Chamberlain and his craven kowtowing to Hitler at Munich is the all time poster boy along with Ron PaleoPaulie;
Reagan Democrats in large numbers giving him two landslide ictories and then being betrayed by each and every GOP POTUS nominee since and every Congressional leader since Newt;
Moral conservatism rooted in serious faith commitment, opposition to baby-killing and defense of marriage;
Guns, God and guts;
An understanding of various conservatives of various persuasions within the movement here and abroad such as Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk, Pope St. Pius X; Pope St. John Paul II, Adam Smith, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich von Hayek, Whittaker Chambers and even Ayn Rand (ignoring her obvious moral deficiencies and strident atheism);
And a whole LOT more. These are what we moved on to as a movement.
The Conservative movement was hijacked by the so-called neocons .. with that , the nation’s current decline lays squarely on their willingness to join with the Dims in aiding in the country’s demise .
Soooooooo... Karl Rove, is that you? Or perhaps, Good Time Charlie Goodell? Or Abbie Hoffman? Or maybe some old blue hair from Code Pink: Peace! Oh, Peace! Yes, PEACE at any Price! I used to bash Weepy Walter Jones but he did something worthwhile against the quisling House leadership lately, maybe voting against Ryan-o for Speaker for which I would forgive much.
The old Main Street bank boardroom pecksniffs died off politically once and for all the day that the bombs dropped on Pearl Harbor. The editor of the once quite paleo New Haven Register (the town where I lived or in its suburbs for my first 54 years), John Flynn was the Executive Director of the uber-isolationist America First! Committee. He went to Chicago on 12/8/41, the day after Pearl Harbor, and joined Colonel McCormack and Charles Lindbergh in folding its tent. Lindbergh eventually was allowed by FDR to fly for the Army Air Corps. That was the end of anything vaguely describable as a "paleo-conservative movement. Now, about all you have left is a few peace creep Congresscritters, a writer or two, an unholy alliance with the antiAmerican eccentric Justin Raimondo of anti-war.com and a few of our local Rockford folks of the Rockford Institute who are considerably saner than Raimondo. Pat Buchanan has gone soft in the head but he was a Nixonian and not a movement conservative.
he country whose demise you are blubbering over largely passed away when Herbert Hoover made such a mess of things in his single term. Yet vestigial "paleo" groups like Americans for Constitutional Action affiliated with him until his death. Then globaloneyists like Landon, Dewey, hapless Willke, Dwight Eisenhower (also had an occasional isolationist urge as in cutting and running from Korea, Nixon, Goldwater (not isolationist but a baby-killing libertine if we ever saw or nominated one), Ford, Bush the Elder, Dole, Bush the Younger, McCain and Moral Monster Mitt Romney (the Antichrist himself and I don't mean his Mormonism).
We did get two wonderful terms (not perfect but wonderful nonetheless) of Ronaldus Maximus, our one and only conservative movement POTUS. Plenty of "Neocons" helped him get elected and govern and da*ned few paleos. And a good thing too!
Many strayed to the right for no other reason than to avoid the unbearable stench to the left.
Lol. I’m thinking a little higher rank than a colonel.
Jesus Christ: You can't impeach Him and He ain't gonna resign.
Interesting post ... the neo-cons infected the Republican party and have become the open-borders interventionist RINO’s that are so eager to get us into conflict with Russia at the behest of Saudi Arabia .. we’ve spilled enough blood for the Saudi aligned sphere of influence . Trump will put an end to it ,and I will add, Buchanan was right all of these years .
Do you know who Donald Kagan, presently of Hamden, Connecticut (born and brought up in Brooklyn, NY), is?
What are his accomplishments?
Are you glad he has stopped being a socialist and become an enthusiastic Reagan Republican? Why? Why not?
The foregoing questions will also be asked as to several other specific individuals by reference to this post substituting only the name of another individual.
Jeanne Kirkpatrick;
Norman Podhoretz;
Gertrude Himmelfarb;
Midge Decter;
Robert Bork;
Same questions as #75 except the following abandoned the Demonrat left without becoming actually Republican:
Daniel Patrick Moynihan;
Martin Diamond;
Alexander Bickel;
Jaroslav Pelikan. That is a short list. I can add more names in both categories.
Final question for extra credit or extra ignominy:
For the conservative movement, which Democrat's foreign policy views do you prefer be adopted: Henry Scoop Jackson or George McGovern and why?
Answers to such questions will garner a LOT more respect for you than will throwing insults. I am what many paleos would call a neo-con. I reject that label. I am a CONSERVATIVE. I have never been an outstanding New York City Jewish intellectual nor a close friend of any, just a blue collar working class Catholic kid by birth and upbringing who benefited from a Jesuit prep school education sooooooo long ago that the Jebbies were still Catholics. Along the way, I had the privilege of becoming acquainted with Bill Buckley, Bill Rusher, Robert Bork, John Bolton, Phyllis Schlafly, John Chamberlain, Frank and Elsie Meyer, John Ashbrook and a lot of other folks you have heard of. I also know Tom Fleming, Chris Check and others at Rockford Institute on the paleo side and their less paleo rivals across the driveway at the Howard Institute as well.
I enjoy Pat Buchanan's books and writing while often disagreeing with my fellow Jesuit prep school alumnus. He was NEVER a movement conservative. He came in through the St. Louis Globe Democrat newspaper, and his long association with the decidedly non-conservative Richard Milhous Nixon, then worked for Reagan in the White House and then became an eccentric. His last great effort was a failed but noble attempt to pin the tail on GHWB, globalist extraordinaire.
As to our enemies, as a nation, we can stick our heads in the sand until they slaughter us, we can send caviar gobbling diployakkers to sell us down the river to our enemies but what a swell party it is, or we can be interventionists, kick their asses, shutter Foggy Bottom, and get each conflict the hell over with. That last one is called interventionism and also CONSERVATISM.
Not sure what you mean about insults .. I try to keep my discourse respectful , and I would advise against confusing aggressive advocacy for my preferred candidate with boorish behavior.
For you to attempt to equate Neo-con with Conservatism is a misnomer at best .. i’m not sure why you want to debate the merits of each individual Neo-con listed , but the constraints of time prohibit me from such an endeavor at this current juncture . I will be more than happy to engage you in a spirited debate regarding this topic in the near future .
In that list , I must say I respect John Bolton regarding domestic policy , but in the foreign policy realm , his aggressive interventionist tendencies have given me great pause.
Regarding your question , I prefer Jackson, as he had the right edge at the right time . The times have changed and the cold war is over . We have shifted from a cold war policy of détente , to a policy of antagonistic interventionism . Our current policy towards the R-Fed is a perfect example of this . Do you disagree ?
I like that analogy.
Henry "Scoop" Jackson famously observed: "I take second place to no man in calling myself a socialist but that does not mean I have to be a damn fool." He displayed one interventionist weapon other than war when he and an Ohio Democrat Congressman named Vanik sponsored Jackson-Vanik to tell our "good friend" Brezhnev that, despite Henry Kissinger and the craven policy of "detente" by which Nixon had become accustomed to grovelling at Brezhnev's feet and romancing our enemies, unless the soviets cut out their crap and allowed free outmigration of Jews, American wheat farmers would not be selling any more grain to the gulag-ridden soviets and the soviet people could substitute eating commissars for breakfast. Kissinger was apoplectic that Congress would turn its back on "humanitarianism" and on Kissinger's budding New World Order bromance with the soviets.
Comrade Georgie McGovern was probably a communist when he flew a B-17 bombing Trieste in World War II. He was certainly a communist by the time he served as a delegate to the "Progressive" Party convention of 1948 to nominate Henry (Yum! He loved the soviets) Wallace because Harry Truman, despite labeling WWI defense contractors as "War Profiteers" for the crime of arming our soldiers like little Captain Harry of Battery D, was not far enough to the Left for the soviets' purposes. Mcgoo was a communist throughout his Senate career and particularly in his spectacularly anti-American opposition to the efforts of our troops in the field in Viet Nam ("this chamber stands knee deep in blood"). Comrade McGoo was a communist when he changed the national rules of the once patriotic Democratic Party guaranteeing its future as the communist DemoNratic Party that it has become. A transition from the party of Jefferson, Madison and Andrew Jackson to the party of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Ho Chi Minh! Did he ever see a communist atrocity that did not sexually excite him? Now dead, he may well be serving as part of the supreme soviet of hell. There I go again bringing up morality.
When time permits your comprehensive response to the questions I posed and you have had the time to fully research them, be sure and get in touch publicly since I usually discourage FReepmail and everyone has a right to see your answers. Be sure to keep a list of the questions. At my age, I am an electronic illiterate and won't be able to retrieve them. If necessary, I can come up with an approximate but not exact similar list.
Since our troops and Navy and Army Air Corps and allies (including Stalin) did such a fine job, however belatedly, of exterminating the menace of Nazi tyranny and freeing a lot of folks from the death camps (but nowhere near as many as COULD have been freed thanks to our weasely politicians both New Deal and "paleo"), the American Left decided that they had now had enough of this politically dangerous war business and have undermined every war since. They want victory over the Nazis to be our very last victory (Code Pink, Sean Penn, Jane Fonda, The "Reverend" William Sloane Coffin, Jr., Abbie Hoffman, Gerry Rubin, Bill Ayres, Bernardine Doehrn, Barack Insane Obozo and a host of other anti-American moral and political cretins).
Not satisfied that the Domesticong would do an adequate job of subverting our nation, a group of folks styling themselves "paleoconservatives" recognized the opportunity to be fashionable by emulating the "conservatism" of long dead Neville Chamberlain and a troop of prairie isolationist nincompoops of the 1930s who wanted to put isolationism and surrender at the forefront of US foreign non-policy. The modern imitation includes such foreign policy disgraces as Ron PaleoPaulie, Weepy Walter Jones, Chuck Hagel and a handful of other public eccentrics serving now or previously in office, and a few writers like Pat Buchanan. They are probably good to their wives, their dogs and their neighbors but they offer nothing in the way of useful or even tolerable foreign policy leadership and they are in what amounts to an alliance with Code Pink and the others above-mentioned.
As to John Bolton, while an undergraduate at Yale, he proved to be a very fine human being, generally gifted with wisdom beyond his years. Nonetheless, he was exceedingly careful to avoid controversy. He belonged to the Conservative Party of the Yale Political Union. How "Conservative" that party was is quite problematical. It endorsed Adlai Stevenson for POTUS in 1952 against equally poor and obsolete opposition in Dwight Eisenhower. John avoided belonging to the Yale Political Union's actually Conservative and larger and more influential party which was The Party of the Right founded in 1954. He also would not join Bill Buckley's Young Americans for Freedom for which I tried to recruit him. I don't believe he joined College Republicans either. He did became Executive Director of an alumni group called Lux et Veritas, Inc., named for Yale's motto, which urged alumni to cut off all financial support to Yale until the evil Kingman Brewster was no longer Yale president.
After graduating Yale and Yale Law (where he befriended Clarence Thomas), he went to Washington to practice law and eventually came to more militant attention in the GWB administration. If his foreign policy leadership gave you "great pause," as a paleo it must have been the sort of pause that Neville Chamberlain suffered at Munich.
Respecting John Bolton for his domestic policy is like respecting Babe Ruth for his glove work in right field or at the opposite extreme Rahm Emmanuel for the ballet dancing of his youth (known in Chicagoland's City of Broad Shoulders therefore as "tiny dancer" among many less flattering things). It may be justified but it kinda misses the point.
Do you think that North Korea and the Mad Mullahs of Teheran SHOULD have nukes because it is only fair, that the boredom and depressing stagnation and stalemate of Mutual Assured Destruction is better somehow than American hegemony, that after the knowledge of the Hitler Holocaust we should "mind our own business" and stick our heads in the sand until the Baaaaaaad People just go away, that any gang of armed thugs anywhere in the world, by merely constituting themselves a "government" or even a "liberation front" may free to establish their own local chain of franchised gulags to smother, torture and murder people en masse guilty only of choosing the wrong country in which to be born? Do we prefer to free them where they and their countrymen live or bring them all over here or just let them be tortured and slaughtered to their tyrants' content?
Men cry: Peace! Peace! But there is no peace.
I confess that I have not the slightest clue as to the meaning of the term "R-Fed." Thus your last question is impossible for me to answer until I have a definition. I googled it but google has not yet caught up with the "abbreviated world" in which we live and often, neither have I.
If I seem a bit harsh in this post from time to time, think of it as "aggressive advocacy" for the CONSERVATIVE movement I have served since my teenage years.
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.