Posted on 08/22/2004 10:29:33 AM PDT by sinkspur
Patrick Buchanan, the conservative commentator whose Republican primary challenge and divisive convention speech weakened the first President Bush's campaign for re-election in 1992, is publishing a book excoriating the second President Bush over the invasion of Iraq, just in time to grab a share of the limelight at another Republican convention.
In Where the Right Went Wrong, released late last week, Buchanan calls the invasion of Iraq "the greatest strategic blunder in 40 years, a mistake more costly than Vietnam. If prudence is the mark of a conservative, Mr. Bush has ceased to be a conservative," Buchanan wrote. The release of the book, which coincides with the Republican National Convention, gives Buchanan occasion to lay out his case on television and in book promotions just as the Bush campaign seeks to project an image of unity, reviving unhappy memories of the disruptive role Buchanan has played in the past.
"He has a following in conservative circles," said Paul Weyrich, a veteran conservative organizer. "It is not what it once was just because the religious right is not particularly enamored with him. But it is going to have an effect. In a very close election, criticism from anybody who is credible is going to have an effect."
In an interview, however, Buchanan said publishing a book during the campaign was the best way he knew to inject what he considers important ideas into the debate. "The reason I wanted it out now is, it addresses big issues that are not being addressed in this campaign: the massive and growing deficit, the disintegration of the culture and a Wilsonian foreign policy that means war ad infinitum," he said.
You'll get banned for posting from a nutburger website that is totally anti-Bush and trashing Bush.
I really don't care, however. Do whatever you want.
Well, that leaves out Pat Buchanan.
I hate it when failed shark jumpers keep wasting our time. Shouldn't Buchanan be out burning synagogues or torturing kittens or something?
Buchanan is anti-jewish (anti-semitic is the wrong word, because smart-allecks point out that Arabs are semitic as well, so how can someone be pro-Arab yet anti-semitic? Call a spade a spade...). He has repeatedly sited Holocaust deniers and their organizations for their research (like the Institute for Historical Review). He has stated that the gas chambers in Nazi Germany were not there to kill Jews, but to clean them (See "Denying History" by Michael Shermer). He later recanted, only to follow that mishap by suggesting that the Allies caused the Holocaust by invading Germany, and if Hitler was left alone, everything would have a-OK. Here is an article that exposes Buchanan's tolerance of the 3rd Reich: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=223
This is serious, serious stuff. A man who, in his late 40s early 50s, valorizes the Nazi troops? Calls Hitler a "soldier's soldier?" Entertains Holocaust denial fantasies? Gripes about the Revolution of "Women's Rights" that needs to happen in the Islamic world? It is the stuff that the Left throws in the face of the GOP, conservatives, free marketeers all the time. Pat Buchanan is a conservative only a Leftist could love, because he validates all the KKK stereotypes that the Left has of capitalists and Christians. He does nothing but damage to the Right, and probably cost Bush I the election w/ his tone deaf "Cultural War" speech. He fights the Cultural War the stupidest and most counterproductive way imaginable, w/ repugnant bombastity and pedantic appeals to life in the 1950s, instead of an affirmation of positive values and the use of logic and reason. He is the epitome of a Pyrrhic victory, someone who may embolden the base only to alienate the majority.
It makes you wonder, if buchanan is that bitter of a piece of dung, or if the greedy SOB isn't on the left's payroll. Two elections in a row now he's tried to screw America.
I vote bitter myself. Being laughed at by millions on a national stage will turn a man mean :)
I think the site BushRevealed.com is actually pretty objective from a true conservative point of view. they simply reveal the Bush record, with mainstream articles. Have you even been to the site?
I know you spport Bush/Cheney04, but you can still vote for Bush without having to be blind to his record. Why do you act like you agree with him on every single thing? That's not realistic. are you a campaign employee or something? even his mouthpeices like hannity pretend to criticize Bush now and then in order to maintain some credibility among listeners.
That clown makes Benedict Arnold look like an "American" patriot.
I don't agree with Bush on everything.
Yes, you would. People who like to use the term "true conservative" usually do buy into that kind of BS.
Thanks for the link. those allegations are pretty ouutrageous,.- i'd never heard that before. as i said above i am not that familiar with Pat so am keeping an open mind on this one. i do , however, believe in closing the borders to illegal invaders, and in sovereignty. Many people here always insult that as being 'xenophobic' & 'isolationist', which only makes them lose credibility. Buchanan aside, the majority of americans dont want illegal aliens invading our country.
Typical of his type.
LOL. just kiddin.
But seriously. You can dismiss me because i like Peroutka's values, but i am in fact someone who voted for Bush in 2000 and 'won't be fooled again'. There are many of us out there and the fact that the GOP thinks they can ignore us might be the reason they lose. the GOP should remain true to its roots, not take advantage and have disdain for the type of values that made it great. getting angry or banning the messenger so to speak will not help the issue.
Sure as hell Kerry has no answers to all this – now someone convince me that Bush and his neocon cheerleaders, more familiar with the inside of think tanks than Abrams tanks, have got any of the answers.
Read the book. Judge for yourself.
68 -Irenius-
______________________________________
Very radical idea for most of FR loudest mouths.
--- Read a book by the opposition? Heaven forbid! The button down mind boggles..
Actually I dismiss you for your willing assistance to the Kerry campaign. Dress it up any way you want, it's nothing less. Same with your new found hero buchanan...only he does it for money.
i didnt mean the link was outrageous. as in unbelievable. i meant the story itself was outrageous., that Pat would say such a thing is troubling. that's what i meant. and i said thanks for the link.
Two in a row?
Didn't he run in 1992 against GHWB (the year he gave his famous culture war speech)? And in 1996 against Dole? 2000 against GWB? And 2004 trashing GWB in a pre-election book?
Seems like four in a row to me.
You actually got one right. buchanan, alongside Hillary, Michael Moore and Kerry is part of the opposition. As for buchanan's book, there's no need to read it...it will just be his same old BS warmed over again.
Can you image where America would have been on 9/11 if buchanan had been successful?
Now image where we will be come late November if he and his minions are successful this time around.
I would never support marxist kerry or anyone like him. Unlike you i realize that no party automatically 'owns' my vote. i am a conservative before i am a party loyalist. i am voting Constitution Party. If a candidate cannot garner enough votes to win, that is the fault of the candidate, not the voters.
do you think that only 2 parties should exist? where is that in the Constitution? Aside from that, it's good for conservatives to focus on Congressional races also, since that will have influence and these races are more easily won than a national presidential election.
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.