Posted on 08/28/2002 9:16:46 AM PDT by sixmil
Patrick J. Buchanan isn't giving up. He's left the Republican Party for good. And he isn't planning a fourth run for the White House.
But he is finally trying something fans have been telling him to do for years. He's founding a magazine.
The new, bi-weekly magazine will debut next month and be called "The American Conservative." Scott McConnell, former editorial-page editor of the New York Post, will edit it. Society gadfly Taki Theodoracopulos will help with cash.
Buchanan is upbeat, about the magazine at least.
"We hope to have a conservative magazine which is genuinely and authentically conservative," he said. "We hope it will be sort of a rallying point for the conservatism that is really utterly unrepresented by either the K Street conservatives or the Weekly Standard, National Review, Commentary, New Republic neocons."
IBD talked with Buchanan at his home in Virginia to get a flavor for the new journal.
IBD: How are we doing in the war on terror?
Buchanan: I think the president did a bully job of diplomacy and moral leadership from September to January. The way they fought that war and won it was outstanding. It was a moral and just war, fought in a moral and just way.
But when he got into identifying an "axis of evil" and then threatening pre-emptive strikes against all nations that might develop the kinds of weapons we've had for the past century, he lost his focus. He has disrupted alliances. He has threatened actions that we don't have the troops in place to take.
He's asserting a right to wage pre-emptive war without the approval of Congress on any nation that aspires to build the kinds of weapons we've had since World Wars I and II. I don't think he's got the right to do that, and I think a policy of warning about pre-emptive strikes is the kind of policy that could invite pre-emptive strikes against us.
IBD: What about a war with Iraq?
Buchanan: Anybody who has a state, including Saddam Hussein, is going to be reluctant to go to war against the United States or to commit any atrocity which would put them in a war with the U.S. Containment and deterrence will work with almost any state.
Saddam is terrified of the United States. He wants to hand over his power to one of these sons of his. He's got all these palaces out there.
Why in heaven's name would he want to trigger a war with the United States of America and have all that blown to kingdom come along with him, his sons, his family, his dynasty, his army, everything?
I don't think we should give up on the policy of deterrence. It frightened Joe Stalin. It frightened Mao Tse-tung. These guys are not in that league.
IBD: What should we be doing here at home?
Buchanan: The first thing we should do is get serious about border security. Since 9-11, we've only had 411,000 illegal aliens come into the United States.
If there is a weapon of mass destruction smuggled into this country, the whole idea of global interdependence and 10,000 Mexican trucks coming into the U.S. every day, almost all of them not inspected, and over a million containers - that's going to come to an end.
It will be a very powerful argument for retiring to economic independence and economic nationalism, where you do not have thousands of people crossing your border every day. One or two more of these attacks and globalization itself is in trouble.
IBD: What will that mean for an open society?
Buchanan: I'm a believer in an open society, I'm a believer in a free society, and this is why I'm opposed to the idea of an empire. They say we need a Department of Homeland Security. I thought the Defense Department was in charge of homeland security. Apparently it's in charge of empire security.
Of what advantage is all this American empire, interfering in all these quarrels around the world, if as a consequence we lose freedom at home and live in constant danger of some kind of small atomic weapon detonated on American soil?
I think the American empire is going to go, and I think that's a good thing. The reason they were over here on 9-11 is that we are over there.
IBD: Where do you see things 10 years from now?
Buchanan: I regret that for the rest of Mr. Bush's first term, we're going to be at war. The president has subcontracted out our Middle East policy to Ariel Sharon, and I think that's a dreadful mistake.
Palestinian terrorists ought to be condemned and Israel has a right to peace, but you have to give the Palestinian people some hope. And I think Bush's (June 24) speech gives them very, very little hope. I think his speech could have been written in Tel Aviv.
IBD: Will there ever be a Palestinian state?
Buchanan: I think the question is not whether there'll be a Palestinian state. There may be two. The ultimate question is whether there's going to be a Jewish state in the Mideast. I think Ariel Sharon is leading them into a cul-de-sac from which there is no way out but back through Oslo and Tabaah and the Saudi plan.
"The American Socialist" would be more appropriate for a magazine founded by Buchanan.
"Publicly, White House spokesmen say Bush would still consult Congress on any decision regarding war on Iraq."
It was the WH lawyer, Alex Gonzales who stated Bush did not need Congressional approval, HE does NOT make the decisions, in fact, although true, it was a very stupid thing for him to say publicly. To top that, Congress has already given their approval to topple Saddam already, via H. CON. RES. 286, dated Dec 11, 2001, the last paragraph which states:
"Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (22 U.S.C. 2151 note) declares that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime of Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the Congress supports the President in using all means at his disposal to encourage the establishment of a democratically elected government in Iraq."
Source: Thomas Legislation Archives
I'm sure the Satanic Druids and Illuminatis are relieved!
I know the feeling.
DPS intelligence reports said Mexico-based rings were responsible for half of all homicides in Maricopa County.
You no speaka the english? Since when does "consult" mean the same as "get approval"? You guys sure play loose with the facts when it suits your twisted agenda.
I fully agree with you, Pat Buchanan is the biggest blow hard around. What makes him think he has any credibility left?
Except those who die for Allah and could care less about loss of life in any country. Buchanan is wrong on this. The best defense is a good offense. He may be conservative but he doesn't understand self-defense.
I also disagree with him vehemently on Israel. Buchanan sees both sides as equal which leads me to believe he is clueless about this religious war we are in, and he is clueless as to the religious nature of the war in Israel. He needs to bone up on radical islam. I will be glad to send him "Islamic Invasion" by Dr. Robert Morey if he needs an education.
So don't watch his show and don't buy his magazine, then. Why whine about it?
Wrong! If the elites and the American intellegentsia -- left and right -- had heeded Buchanan's calls for tighter borders years ago we never would have had these homocidal ragheads in our country! Pat was right then and he is right now.
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.