Posted on 01/08/2009 5:34:09 PM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Buchanan has a long history of making negative remarks about people who did not come to America from Europe and chiefly northern Europe. He made a statement one time in the early nineties implying that the only good Americans came from northern Europe. Funny since being of Irish heritage, Buchanan's own ethnic group was despised by many Americans for not being American enough.
High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
Pat is more full of beans than a Boston beanpot.
Buchanon gives conservativs a bad name.
He should be shunned.
Buchanenwald must constantly struggle to keep his arm from shooting up in a Nazi salute a la Strangelove.
I'm beginning to wonder how 'far off the mark' I may have been on some of the other things I 'thought' he said...
I supported and debated for Pat Buchanan in 2000. He’s lost it. However, let’s not buy the left’s revision on wht hppened in 2000. Buchanan got 2% of the vote in a district where 5% where Reform party members. Pat’s brother lived in that rea and campaigned for him. Is it really hrd to believe that 1/2 of Reform Party members in his brother’s district would have voted for him?
Pat Buchanan Says Gaza is an “Israeli Concentration Camp” - Video 1/8/09
Freedom’s Lighthouse | January 9, 2009 | BrianinMO
Posted on 01/09/2009 6:13:35 AM PST by Federalist Patriot
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2161537/posts
Alan Colmes Says NY Times Gaza Coverage is Too PRO-Israel
IPT/Yidwithlid | 1/8/09 | Yidwithlid
Posted on 01/08/2009 5:44:46 PM PST by Shellybenoit
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2161324/posts
The Libs’ true colors come out with their support of Terrorists!!!
GOP Mike’s Blog | 1/9/09 | GOP Mike
Posted on 01/09/2009 6:05:45 AM PST by gopmike.com
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2161534/posts
‘Concentration camp’ remark threatens Pope’s visit to Israel
London Times | January 8, 2009 | Richard Owen
Posted on 01/08/2009 9:46:55 PM PST by Steelfish
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2161430/posts
[snip] after a prominent cardinal said that Gazans were living in a “big concentration camp”... Cardinal Renato Martino, the head of the Vatican Council for Justice and Peace and a former Holy See envoy to the United Nations... compared Gaza to a concentration camp... criticised Israel for killing civilians who had taken shelter at a UNrun school in Gaza. Israeli officials said that they were “deeply shocked that a man of religion is using the vocabulary of Hamas propaganda”. The Simon Wiesenthal Centre, which monitors antiSemitism and hunts down Nazi war criminals, said that Cardinal Martino had used the language of a “Holocaust denier”. [end]
-meanwhile-
Joe the Plumber: Mr. Smith Goes to Jerusalem for Pajamas TV
Pajamas Media | January 7 | Roger L. Simon
Posted on 01/07/2009 4:53:10 PM PST by AJKauf
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2160615/posts
It doesn’t....unless they are always ‘critical’ in every situation. Unfortunately, Buchanan always seems to come down on what-ever side is against the jews. It is probably deep seated and an ‘inherited’ mindset, that for some reason, unconsciously, he doesn’t dare upset.
So, if a person is always critical of Islam, say, then they must just be a bigot against Muslims? Or, is it possible that Islam simply keeps doing similar things over and over?
What nobody seems to wish to recognize here is that some people, certainly nations, tend to do similar things often, or hold similar positions over a long period of time. Democrats, for instance, tend to say silly things and hold untenable positions. I am not a bigot against them, but I do tend to be very critical about them. The same is true of many, many other bodies, countries, groups and individuals.
Going about defining anyone who disagrees with one group too much as a bigot is exactly what the left does. It is a wonderful way to silence disagreement. You don't like gay marriage? You are a homophobe. You don't like welfare state politics? You are a racist. People on this thread are doing nothing but aping the left, and doing it well. You don't support Israel enough then you are an anti-semite. Bogus.
LOL. That’s too dumb to warrant a response.
Really? Oh, okay. So if you or I are critical of a group, and are so over and over, that is okay. That is just sound reasoning and careful consideration. But, if another person doesn't like the actions or positions taken by a group that you support then they are just bigots. And yet you say that my position is the dumb one.
That you cannot see how that is exactly the kind of ridiculous "reasoning" used by the left every day is very sad. It also shows how so-called conservatism today is nothing more than liberalism in better clothes.
Sorry, but "gifted & courageous" don't spring to mind when Hitler is mentioned. But I will give him "dark & mysterious"...
Courage is only a virtue in pursuit of good. Courage to do evil is not a virtue. Sure Hitler had courage. So what? That doesn't mean he was admirable in any way. And gifted? Are you kidding? You don't think his oratorical skills could be classified that way? What about his ability to bend others to his will? Many people are gifted, and many abuse or twist their gifts against He who gave them. There are singers of incredible talent who use their gifts to raise money to fund abortions. Being gifted does not, again, mean that a person admires you.
I think we should also see the quote in context. Consider what Pat said first:
Though Hitler was indeed racist and anti-Semitic to the core, a man who without compunction could commit murder and genocide, he was also an individual of great courage...Racist, anti-semitic, "without compunction" and a genocidal murderer? And people here believe this is a statement of admiration. People don't want to like Pat Buchanan and are twisting his words to make one thing sound like another. And who do we know that likes to do that? The liberals, that's who. Why, I wonder, do so many people here on this forum want to sound so much like those they keep protesting against?
Putting it into context in this instance is on par with anyone who says, “well, no offense, BUT...” before following up with “your wife is ugly/I hate (racial epithet here)/down with jews/etc”
I hardly think the people on these boards taking direct quotes and drawing obvious conclusions about the nature of those who made them somehow equates us to the individual discussed. Further implying that makes somehow makes me a Liberal is pretty classless, too. I can’t think of a nastier insult
Accordng to experts, “Pat Buchanan” is an anagram for “jew hating pundit well past his relevance”
Good point. There really is a mindset here with Buchanan though that can’t be denied. Maybe it is more geared to an opposition to the state of Israel and is not classic anti semitism. I really don’t know what Pat’s problem is with Israel....but it is there.
I hardly think the people on these boards taking direct quotes and drawing obvious conclusions about the nature of those who made them somehow equates us to the individual discussed.
First of all these are not obvious conclusions. They are absurd twisting of meaning. Secondly, I never equated you to Pat Buchanan. Pat Buchanan is a very intelligent and well spoken individual. I said that the tactic of hurling accusations of hate and bigotry because you don't like a person's position is what liberals do. Or perhaps you haven't been around long enough to hear what is said about people who oppose gay marriage, or affirmative action, or any number of other liberal causes by those who champion them. And by choosing to use that tactic you act like a liberal. No equating necessary.
Further implying that makes somehow makes me a Liberal is pretty classless, too. I can’t think of a nastier insult
Can't you? Perhaps you should try harder.
Accordng to experts, “Pat Buchanan” is an anagram for “jew hating pundit well past his relevance”
There, now I knew you could do it.
There really is a mindset here with Buchanan though that can’t be denied. Maybe it is more geared to an opposition to the state of Israel and is not classic anti semitism. I really don’t know what Pat’s problem is with Israel....but it is there.
You may be right. He often seems unsympathetic to Israel, that is true. However, I have often heard him speak in defence of Israel as a state and their right to protect their own borders. Therefore I would not be comfortable saying he is anti-israel. I think his great sin, as far as the modern "conservative" movement, has been his unwillingness to concede our interests in preference for those of Israel. While he has clearly recognized that our interests are sometimes shared, even saying we should help Israel to defend their borders, he has also been very harsh regarding how much influence Israel and pro-israel organizations have over our agenda and policies, going so far as to describe the Congress, IIRC, as "Israeli occupied territory." So, it has always seemed to me that he is overall pro-Israel, but is critical of the influence brought to bear on our government on the issue.
It seems to me that Pat Buchanan has committed no outrage beyond taking a classically conservative position and seeking the interests of the USA before those of others. Here is a powerful voice supporting life, gun rights and traditional Christian values and the right wing attacks him again and again because he isn't virulently pro-israel. How ridiculous is that? And that position is twisted to try to insinuate he is a bigot, regardless of the fact that he has never, to my knowledge anyway, said anything truly anti-semitic. Israel is a political state, with political views, and we have to be grown up enough to quit acting like criticism of a political position is an act of bigotry against some minority group.
His use of inflammatory language is a reflexion of his hatred of what neoconservatives love (although the love America too), as well as his appeasement attitude towards Islam. Like all appeasers, he despises the embattled ally far more than the proclaimed enemy.
Pat equates Neoconservatives with Israeli patriots. All else follows, including his attachment to the leftist positions on Israel and blind hatred for Israel nationalists who agree with him on blood and soil.
If he equates neoconservatives with Israeli patriots then this thread would seem to prove him right. Here he is being called a liberal. Consider that. Pat Buchanan, a liberal. That means that today, according to the neoconservatives at this site, a liberal is a person who is unyieldingly pro-life, opposed to any gun control, stands firm against the homosexual agenda and feminism and is a staunch proponent of strong borders, but who also believes America's interests should come before Israel's. That honestly sounds like either Israeli patriotism or terminal stupidity. Probably both.
Finally, there is an echo chamber, where most people try to one up each other.
I would note that if you read through the posts there are 4 other former Buchanan supporters quite angry at Pat on this issue.
Right now I am taking a break from formulating a response to Paul Gottfried's defense of Taki's inescapable antisemetism, where he outs me.
I dislike Pat Buchanan. I really do. He is an unfunny boor. I forgot what this was about, but Buchanan is an anti-semite, and a moron. That pretty much covers it all. Thanks.
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.