Taliban Pat Buchanan on with Michael Medved This Hour (With streaming-audio link)

KRLA ^ | August 30, 2004

[quidnunc]

Listen via KRLA in Los Angeles.

http://www2.krla870.com/listen/

[CWOJackson]

Take care and again, thanks for the post. It's always great to be able to hear pat make a clown out of himself. It only serves to remind me how his whole America first thing was nothing but marketing.

See you later...and don't make the Patsies cry (too much).

[George W. Bush]

I lost the last shred of respect I had for him in 2000 when he tried to argue that some of the votes for him in Florida should have went to Gore.

Me too. There is a time for keeping your mouth shut. The only argument he could muster appeared to be that that many Jews couldn't have voted for him. Well, it was a strange argument, to say the least...

[Smocker]

Pat Buchanan is a great patriotic American. His words will one day prove to have been prophetic.

[ex-snook]

"Pat Buchanan is a great patriotic American. His words will one day prove to have been prophetic. "

Well said. And Pat is off to a good start in saying our one-sided trade agreements will cost jobs, illegal immigration is bad for America, as is abortion, homosexual practices, World Robocop entanglements and the Swiftboat Vets will down Kerry. He is right. That is why opponents are reduced to calling him smear names.

[zbigreddogz]

There's a time to let THE FREAKING CONSTITUTION decide. It doesn't say anything about guessing who voters 'intended' to vote for. It says count who they actually voted for. In his quest for vengence, he tried to sell out his old party, and the Constitution of the United States.

He's about as low as you can get as far as I am concerned.

And it IS interesting that he thought Jews wouldn't vote for him. It lends credibility to the belief that he is an anti-semite.

[BobS]

Bush doesn't want coverage of the river boat guys to screw up his own message. That's all. There is no difference between them.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

The only argument he could muster appeared to be that that many Jews couldn't have voted for him. Well, it was a strange argument, to say the least.

Even the notoriously dishonest Pat is further along the road towards acknowledging the ugly truth about himself than are his apologists, t'would seem. :)

[nkycincinnatikid]

"He thought jews wouldn't vote for him. lends credibility to the beleif he is an anti-semite" You nailed it man! Every Republican politician is therefor most likely an anti-semite. Thanks to nuggets like yours,Pat Buchanan threads are always informative.

[SJackson]

Yes, I read it. Amazing how pat doesn't feel that 3,000 of our people killed here, at home, by Islamic Extremists, who he doesn't consider to be a threat to the United States, is much...yet he tried to make an issue over the thousands of body bags which were going to be pouring home from the new Vietnam.

He's right, 3,000 dead Americans isn't all that many. And the survival of Israel is no more significant to America than the survival of Poland to England, per Neville Buchanan.

[zbigreddogz]

Try and spin what I said however you want. It won't change the fact that he's a palisinian sympathizer and an anti-semite.

[SJackson]

Buckley had it right, a long time ago ago. Of course, like most media types, Pat does have comments on both sides of the Jewish issue (odd Pat concerns himself with a Jewish issue). Rather Kerryesque.

[SJackson]

The only argument he could muster appeared to be that that many Jews couldn't have voted for him. Well, it was a strange argument, to say the least...

He's probably right. After all, if they're smart enough to take over the government, they're smart enought to read a ballot :>)

[SJackson]

Well said. And Pat is off to a good start in saying our one-sided trade agreements will cost jobs, illegal immigration is bad for America, as is abortion, homosexual practices, World Robocop entanglements and the Swiftboat Vets will down Kerry. He is right. That is why opponents are reduced to calling him smear names.

Right, he's the only guy who thinks of these things. Republicans need to embrace him, like they need to embrace David Duke. He has supporters after all.

[uncbob]

Satisfied?

Well then I am sure you would be quite put out if somebody made the stupid remark you made about Buchanan's uncles if they did that to yours

So I will be satisfied when you retract it

[CWOJackson]

LOL! I see the Patsies sulked off into the night. It must get awfully demoralizing for them trying to support that clown.

[kevao]

Well then I am sure you would be quite put out if somebody made the stupid remark you made about Buchanan's uncles if they did that to yours

So I will be satisfied when you retract it

Retract it? No way. It's a good joke. I LOL'ed when I first heard it, because it has a basis in fact -- Pat's anti-Semitism.

You don't think Pat is anti-Semitic; I do. Thus, you don't find the joke funny; I do.

Pat was my first Conservative hero when I was a youngster (well, second, next to WFB). I still love Pat personally, and still agree with much of what he says. However, I don't go along with his protectionist views. And, I do hate to say it, he's anti-Semitic.

I must say, he has been especially awesome lately with his support of the Swifties. Go Pat!

And go Israel, too! ;-)

[jd777]

Why?

Does "Zionist" means Jew:? Then why the separate name? Isn't it perhaps because there are zionists who are not Jewish. Is that not so? Those who might be Evangelical Christians? Or maybe even catholics? They are zionists also. So why would you say Anti-zionist means Anti-semitic? __

Perhaps you are just using that left wing (neo-con?) tactic of suggesting any disagreement with your particular ideology indicates some latent racism on behalf of the person questionng you...

[SJackson]

Why?...Does "Zionist" means Jew:? Then why the separate name? Isn't it perhaps because there are zionists who are not Jewish. Is that not so? Those who might be Evangelical Christians? Or maybe even catholics? They are zionists also. So why would you say Anti-zionist means Anti-semitic?...Perhaps you are just using that left wing (neo-con?) tactic of suggesting any disagreement with your particular ideology indicates some latent racism on behalf of the person questionng you...

Why what? I haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about. Next time, reference the post

On the off chance that addressing the earlier posts about Zionism and antisemitism, pull out your Ouija board and ask Martin Luther King, they're his words, not mine, though I don't disagree. You're the first to accuse MLK of being a one of the left wing neocons, at least that I've seen.

[quidnunc]

akronian wrote: So are saying that the neocons are primarily Jewish?

Some of them are, but most aren't. < P>But because a number of prominent neocons — such as Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and the Kristos — are Jewish, the term "neocon" has become for paleocons and liberals code for Jews.