Replies

That's a perceptive point. We see it here on FR every election cycle -- a battle of the pragmatic vs. the ivory tower conservatives. Being a president in our current political environment, trying to balance between pragmatism and what's ideal, is thankless and virtually impossible.

But I think Buchanan's problem is greater than that. He's declared war upon the "neo-cons" that he perceives have hijacked conservatism in America. They're for US intervention (e.g., Iraq) in an era where we're the only superpower, and believe in "American exceptionalism." In order to take issue with the neo-cons, Buchanan, fighting for the "paleos," is isolationist. His viewpoint wasn't realistic in the 1930s; it's certainly no realisitic now. I'm not so sure Buchanan is guilty of anti-semitism; it's simply that most of the neo-cons are Jewish, and pro-Israel.

Neither am I convinced that he is anti-semetic.....though with each passing year, I question it more. I'd like to think he's simply caught up in the persona and position he has staked out in order to maintain a profile. In other words, I really wonder how fervently he believes his own stuff.....vs how fervently he wants a platform, a paycheck, a legacy, and/or relevance.

I'm not so sure Buchanan is guilty of anti-semitism; it's simply that most of the neo-cons are Jewish, and pro-Israel.

Even *if* that's true, how does it explain his antisemitism which goes back at least a decade more than that? Do you remember his comments on the eve of the first Gulf War -- especially about Israel's "amen corner" in Congress, as well as some other equally offensive claptrap?