Replies

In the "Buchanan World" it would not be necessary to invade Iraq, or even fight the WOT, all we need do is lock the doors, pull in the welcome mat, and prepare to conduct a new "cold war" with Saddam, Iran, Al Qaeda, etc. We would be just as secure as we were before all these terrible Neocons took over. Like... when Clinton was "focusing like a laser beam" on terrorism, and he and Richard Clarke effectively seized Ozama Bin Laden, and prevented the 9/11 attack on the WTC. Funny how different the "Buchanan World" is from the real one.

On the issue of fighting the WOT, Buchanan is deadwrong.

On the illegal immigration issue, Pat is right on the money.

Just like Dubya Bush, Pat Buchanan has been wrong on some issues and right on others.

Dubya Bush is deadwrong on domestic spending, expansion of the federal bureaucracy and immigration. On those three issue, Buchanan has been right. Conservative right. Both Buchanan and Dubya are pro-life and Pat has prasied PresBush for his conservative appointments to the federal courts.

On the big issue, the WOT, Pat opposes Bush. Pat's isolationist and protectionist mentality hurts him with many conservatives. Including this conservative. Not to mention, Pat doesn't like Dubya Bush. He didn't care for Bush41 either.

As usual Pat goes over the top. He always makes some valid points, but goes too far. I agree, Bush could do more on immigration. He has not completely ignored illegal immigration, but his proposals are not effective. Pat's two conflicting worlds does amount to a contradiction. Immigration is more a threat to our culture than anything else. A committed terrorist is going to get in the country if we put the entire National Guard on our borders. Most of them flew in with visas.

I fail to see how Bush has brought back Wilsonianism and Marxism. Bush policies encouraging democracy are not naive idealism, they make sense. During the Cold War we chose to support some unpalatable dictators because of the Soviet Threat. Jimmy Carter's naive idealism of "human rights " at all costs resulted in our dropping the Shah and allowing Iran to be take over by Islamic extremists that have poisoned wells all over the Middle East. Bush has avoided such naive choices, encouraging democracy in place of brutal and genocidal dictators not only gives us the high ground, but it allows the people to choose their future. It has hit a huge setback with Hamas winning the PLA elections. However, in order to look into the long run, such temporary setbacks may be necessary. In some ways the setback in Iran (unnecessary) may still result in a pro-American country since most of the people there are now fed up with Islamic Revolutions. Hopefully, the people will eventually have the government that they want. Wilson's idealism had good elements. Self-determination makes sense unless you enforce it down to the province level like in Kosovo. If Marxism has taken over dubya's policies, I wish Pat had elaborated.

Further National security policy is not inconsistent with free trade. As usual Pat's isolationism had to throw in the ever decline of manufacturing jobs in the USA, which has no connection to our war with Islamic radicals.

Bush has not been my perfect President, I wish he would do much more stemming the tide of illegal immigration, but give him credit for what he has done.