Skip to comments.An 'Authentic' Conservative, Buchanan Parts With Bush
Posted on 08/28/2002 9:16:46 AM PDT by sixmil
click here to read article
No, and attacking Iraq it won't keep the next attack from happening either! We must destroy Mecca to do that. Destroy Mecca and radical islam dies. That simple. Buchanan hasn't a clue about islam.
If Pat wants to put forth potential solutions and forward thinking ideas to better our country I might listen, but it seems that his greatest commodity is the ability to find fault in everyone else but himself. As for me - I'm not buying.
That's not far from the argument the dems put forward supporting Gore over Bush.
I'm glad someone is out there finding fault in this world of unaccountable collective guilt and innanimate objects that are always to blame.
Considering the number of people slaughtered internationally since 1920, it doesn't seem like such a bad place to be. Certainly Americans were more independent and free back then.
Including his campaign manager?
I don't care if he was married to a Jew.
His published remarks show antipathy
Possibly, but you would still be labeled an isolationist unlike most of the founding fathers, even though they were. Do they not make kids read Monroe Doctrine anymore?
Gosh, Noam Chomsky is a conservative! Who would have thunkit?!
I have to admit I agree completely.
Well congratulations, your opinion puts you in a group larger than the group that pulled the level for Buchanan, including accidental votes.
And you see that I turn this fastball right around and go on offense.
Piece of cake.
I was talking about Pat. Not Forbes. You guys really are too much.
If you want to know the honest truth, I wouldn't touch you with gcruse's ten foot pole and blame it on your hubby. To do otherwise would risk polluting my offspring's DNA.
Not for anything, but despite your paranoia, gcruse and I have no connection outside this forum except for saying the same things we've been saying for nearly 5 years, long before you ever showed up. Although he would make a most excellent mini-me.
I could care less about what you say or think, but could you do other freepers the courtesy of pinging them when you decide to rant about them behind their back?
PA has no territory. They need to get a life and move to the Sahara. All the land to the Tigres and Euphates Rivers belongs to Israel. Whether the Euroweenies know it or not, they are doing the devil's work due to their ignorance. A thought occured to me: They (Euroweenies) don't want the Israelis controlling the oil supply, even though the Israelis would do a better job of extracting it (IMO).
That's right, I was talking about Forbes, and you are dodging the question, or missing the point. See if you can stick with me for a few seconds. You seem to be saying that Pat is a loser because he lost the republican nomination, and also the presidency. That is, he lost the run for president twice. There are numerous examples of people losing more than once. Some of them still end up winning in the end. In fact, it is actually not the norm to win the first or second time you run, and that does not even count trying to just win the nomination of your party. So, I am trying to see if you just hate Pat, or if you think anyone who loses twice is a loser. Are you still with me? Steve Forbes is one of many throughout history who have failed twice to win the presidency, so, do you think he is a loser too, or do you just hate Pat? Either answer is OK, even though I suspect the latter, I'm just curious.
BTW, who is you guys? I thought I was mostly alone here, like 1% or less.
Too bad you didn't read "A Republic, Not An Empire" more recently where he called Hitler a thug. Same word he uses for Saddam, BTW.
LOL, change the first period to a comma, and you would have contradicted yourself all in one sentence.
But their deification grates me.
It is not a matter of diefication. They got most of it right, and we are just unlearning what they taught us so that we can all go and learn the same lessons again as if they never existed. That is political de-evolution in my book. I'd rather see us build on what they did instead of tearing it down only to suffer through the same problems in order to relearn things we already knew.
Well that is certainly good news, since I was under the impression that we were harboring them here.
That would be perfect if we could continue the cycle. First we make buddies with Saddam and help him out only to find out he is the bad guy. Next we wipe him out and put the Kurds in charge. Later we will find out they are the bad guys and we will have to kill them and put another corrupt bunch of 3rd worlders in charge. When are we going to stop this idiocy? Don't get me wrong, this kind of stuff is fun when playing Civilization or RISK, but this is real life, not a game.
Some portion of 270 if you believe the thread count. That would include you, and our friends at IBD who wrote the article. And don't forget the <1% too. It's kind of funny how Buchanan threads regularly pull in 200+ posts despite being so insignificant. Perhaps you could cut that in half by getting yourself and your compatriots to stop posting the usual 'insignificant', 'wacko', and 'hates Jews' diatribes.
He rants. He raves. He's, at times, entertaining. Since the Nixon White House (and I'd argue that he wasn't much use there, even) he hasn't done anything of consequence. He's a joke. A charicature of a politician and a hack journalist. A genuine throwback to an era of "machine" politicians. He ran for president the same way Quixote tilted at windmills. Blindly and to validate himself. A mere gadfly, he is. The George Stuffituphisass of the right wing.
BTW, who is you guys? I thought I was mostly alone here, like 1% or less.
But you are a vocal lot, eh?
You couldn't tell that from how some of the people around here talk.
Pray tell how he would accomplish this Herculean task. He talks the talk. However, the difference between amateurs and professionals is that amateurs talk strategy, and professionals talk logistics. And the logistics of securing the borders of the United States would make it extremely difficult to walk the walk.
Darn those tax cuts. So the federal government gets about $1200 less of my money this year because W, and not Pat, is President. Boo-Hoo. Pat is many things; CONSERVATIVE is not one of them.
Cutting taxes is not conservative, cutting the size of government is. Bush may even be surpassing Clinton in that regard.
That is the excuse from the Blame America First crowd, it is not the real reason, however I do understand how some come to that view by watching snippets of statements on the lamestream news without delving into all the aspects of the declared "jihad" aka "holy war". The official spokesman for the Al-Qaeda organization, Suliman Abu Rith has stated that this is a "struggle between Good and Evil" because "U.S. policy is biased towards Jews and Christians across the world".
While Bin Laden does mention occupation, he stated in a 1998 interview that "Surely, their presence is not out of concern over their interests in the region. ... Their presence has no meaning save one and that is to offer support to the Jews in Palestine who are in need of their Christian brothers to achieve full control over the Arab Peninsula which they intend to make an important part of the so called Greater Israel."
So it is not our occupation they are fighting against, but rather our support of Israel as God's chosen nation based on our beliefs in the Bible. They feel they must drive Israel into the sea, not merely because of the land at stake...but because their hatred is rooted in their concept that Judaism and/or Christianity is evil and they wish it purged from their midst, because they feel their religion is the one and only true religion.
LOL! Right on Pat!
Rodney King is a thug. Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin were mass murderers.
So if I produce a quote with PJB calling Hitler a mass murderer then you will take back your accusation?
You are pretty close to suggesting that I think the attacks on our country were justified. I am only suggesting that they were prompted by our meddling and ignorance. No one could ever justify what was done to my former neighborhood on 9/11. There are really only two ways to go at this. You can either spread yourself all over the world and be prepared to fight on a regular basis, or you can stay home and work on your own problems. We are trying to take the middle road of getting in the middle of the ring without putting up our dukes. I can not think of a better way to get kicked in the teeth on a regular basis and forcing yourself to fight like a cornered animal. Why are our troops being turned into peace keepers and nation builders? Why are our defense forces defending the rest of the world and not us?
I fail to see how this supports your point, in fact it seems to bolster mine. Imagine if there were a Saudi airbase in the US to help us prevent a Mexican invasion. Pretty ridiculous, but I doubt we would stand for it even if our politicians allowed it.
A tad paranoid aren't we? How can I "talk" about you behind your back in a "public" forum?? Good grief, you need a reality check.
BTW, You didn't let me down with your rant either. Thanks for the chuckles and proof of my opinion of you. You were SO EASY to bait!! :o)
However, I do not support the "open border" policy that seems to be in effect now.
Fine. I just want to see some concrete details. A lot of folks seem to think that all they have to due is wish it so, and it will happen.
I believe we should do everything to control it.
Again, pray tell me the details.
Giving up, to me is not the answer.
I want to see something realistic that American citizens will be willing to support. Americans say in opinion polls that they do not support illegal immigration, but that's a high-level idea, much like being opposed to sin and in favor of motherhood. When I start talking about the kinds of things that you'd have to do to actual accomplish those high-minded goals, a lot of Americans start to not like the idea.
Then again, I must be one of the few people who can truly appreciate the irony of a guy with a Proposition 187 bumper sticker and an "American Patrol" bumper sticker on his truck...and with half a dozen non-English-speaking day laborers in the bed.
I do like your screen name, though.
Okay, Poohbah, what do YOU think we should do to accomplish this very difficult task to close our borders? If our prop 187 (which was approved by 60% of Californians) was tossed out by a judge, and subequently trashed by Davis, what do you think anyone could do that would not suffer the same fate, by the same group of idiots that we have in charge now??.
First off, recognize that it won't be done cheaply or quickly. There are Freepers out there who think that assigning 30,000 troops to border security will magically make the illegals stop trying to cross the border. When pressed for details, they either (a) accuse doubters of being "defeatist" for pointing out that their proposal translates to only 600 soldiers guarding a minimum of 2,000 miles of border at any one moment, or (b) propose rules of engagement that are utter violations of the Geneva Convention. (One now-nuked Freeper actually proposed cross-border raids with B-52 bombers to retaliate for border-crossing events--one illegal entry, one village in Northern Mexico flattened.)
Second, we're going to have do decide if we really want the full panoply of features needed to ensure that everyone here is here legally, or if we're just doing this to make ourselves feel better. Some Freepers actually demand (a) deportation of all illegal aliens and (b) no means of identifying the ones who should be deported (i.e., they oppose any form of national identification).
Third, whatever we do, we're probably going to have to do some form of "regime change" in Mexico. The problem we have is a product of having a corrupt Third World governmental, economic, and social order right next door to a prosperous, stable, and free republic. That is going to have to change--and probably the only way to change it is to invade Mexico, throw out the regime, and occupy it for 20 years, integrating it into the US.
If our prop 187 (which was approved by 60% of Californians) was tossed out by a judge, and subequently trashed by Davis, what do you think anyone could do that would not suffer the same fate, by the same group of idiots that we have in charge now?
There was a reason Proposition 187 was thrown out: it was very badly written. The biggest problem was that it had no severability clause--if one element got tossed, the entire package went with it. Secondly, it attempted to assert state authority over federal funds (the federal grants for MediCal and AFDC) based on something that was under the authority of the federal government. Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn't let states dictate things like that to the federal government. If the state spends Uncle's money, it has to follow Uncle's rules.
the third reply posted, and already we have the first ad hominem.
I will try it, too. I am disheartened by Pats rejection at the Presidential debates in 2000. As a result, Illegal Immigration became a non-issue even as it is and remains a huge problem! Judging by all the Ad Hominem attacks on Buchanan on this site and elsewhere, it appears that the Right as well as the Left, are defending at least one identical premise: "no outsiders welcome."
I do not agree with Buchanan on everything, but there is one thing about the man that distinguishes him from every other politician: If you ask Buchanan a question, he will give you an answer to that question. You might not like the answer, but you will get one.
THANK GOD FOR THIS!
"But he is finally trying something fans have been telling him to do for years. He's founding a magazine."
Founding a magazine? Sounds like Bay's at it again. It should be called, "Smoke and Mirrors".
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.
Scott McConnell, now thats funny. McConnell was one of the reason for Pat doing badly in his Presidential bid. I bet the focus is going to be on "Illegal Aliens". Thats all the McConnell knows. Guess the mag is enroute to the toilet as well. Just what we need another spin magazine. How does someone like Buchanan get away with a scam like this?
Twenty years of occupation to root out a corrupt oligarchy and teach the next generation about freedom. Meanwhile, Mexico would get a huge influx of capital investment to exploit her natural wealth (which is considerable), because US law (even martial law) is far more business-friendly than Mexico's. By the time the twenty years end, you'd probably see a bunch of gringos heading south to make their fortune in the new territories (and probable future states) of Oaxaca, Sonora, and Baja California. The locals would probably be getting in on the ground level--so their welfare dependence would be far less than you'd think.
In the long run, it would be a LOT cheaper than to continue the present course.
I don't know where you live, but here in CA, we are heavily taxed to support our legals and illegals.
I live in CA. Yup, we're heavily taxed.
As for the Federal government supporting all of these benefit programs, like AFDC, Medi-Cal, prisons, insurance programs for kids, free prenatal care for illegals, help for working families,etc., they have cut down considerably in the amount of funds alloted to us. They promise, but unfortunately don't always deliver.
Ain't it a b!tch when our state votes the wrong way in the 2000 election?
Bush has ZERO incentive to make things easy for Grayout Doofus.
BTW, the Feds support what THEY are willing to pay for all these--Grayout Doofus and the Dimocruds opted to pay way above the Federally-supported amount.
That's part of the reason CA is in debt up to it's ears in the amount of 23 billion dollars. Davis of course, wants to be re-elected and promises everything he can to ensure this happens.
Yup--so he can get at least two more years of Bush, and possibly finish out his term under the guy. Davis may or may not be light in the loafers, but he does seem to have a masochistic streak a mile wide.