Posted on 09/18/2004 6:07:04 PM PDT by Former Military Chick
Yes it is true -- he is anti-semitic. He and Hillary would get along in that regard. While Pat bounces off the walls alot in his manifesto, he does have a core of true conservatism, a lust for a return to "real" America, but with alot of rough edges, and a bit of myopia.
Bill Buckley drummed Pat out of the respectable wing of the conservative movement for his anti-semitism, just as he excised the John Birch Society from our ranks.
Puppies are cute. Kittens are cute. Baby ducks are cute. I would not put Pat Buchanan in that category. *shudder*
The guy who lost an uncle in Germany during WWII. He fell out of a guard tower and broke his neck.
(Don't blame me, I heard in on Imus years ago)
Everytime a bus, pizza parlor or anything along that line
that a suicide murderer destroys in Israel I try to send Pat a photo for his scrapbook.
How does this moron know that president Bush needed no prompting??? This guy seems to think that his opinion is a legitimate critique of P. Buchanan...It reads more like an advertisement...I'm going to buy the book...
Everyone has a deep, dark secret, and mine is thinking Pat Buchanan is cute ... I didn't say I think he's right, or even sane, just cute.
More like who gives a royal crap what Buchanan has to think or say!
Pat, Pat, Pat. All the good gets flushed out with the bad...
"Alert readers will have spotted another troubling flaw in Buchanan's worldview. His roster of warmongers is made up exclusively of Jews. But it was Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and the president himself -- good Christians all -- who sent all those armed Americans into Iraq. Aside from Wolfowitz, the Jewish neocons could only cheer them on from their op-ed pages, think tanks and talk shows.
Buchanan thinks he can explain this discrepancy between conservatives who decide and those who merely advocate. The neconservatives, he claims, saw that George W. Bush was ignorant about world politics and cleverly persuaded him to think like them. At one point, he compares Richard Perle's ''delight at first meeting the future president'' with Fagin's ''initial encounter with the young Oliver Twist.'' After four decades of close political combat, Buchanan seems unwilling to abandon such abusive rhetoric. It may be as essential to him as God and the flag, even while it confirms his status as a political pariah. Strangely, he doesn't realize that the president, a born-again Christian, needed no special prompting after the attacks of Sept. 11 to declare a new world war between good and evil."
Fair enough. I respect that. And besides, it gives me some hope. If there's someone out there who thinks Pat Buchanan is cute, there's bound to be someone out there who thinks I'm cute. Yay! : )
His title actually elecits a belly laugh.
Second term for concervative president coming up. Both houses with conservative majority.
And to this idiot it all went wrong.
And how did it go wrong. The right are not leftiest like he is.
Few bigger lying hypocrites than pat Buchanan areound these days.
Maybe its a mental thing with him, I don't know.
(To quote Samuel Goldwyn, include me out, please!)
I'm glad Savage came out against Buchanan, calling him a defeatist. Even after having him on his show a few times.
Buchanan is Deepthroat.
He does raise a good point -- Cheney and Rumsfeld were far more central in the move to war than Kristol or Krauthammer. But this book grew a lot out of journalistic polemics and reviews of books. Rightly or wrongly, politicians and administrators are usually given a pass, in that they're allowed to disassociate themselves from their policies more than those who simply advocate, propose, or agitate for such policies. People extend more chances to elected officials than to polemicists and ideologists, who are tied to the policies that they've promoted. It's not necessarily anti-Semitism, just the age-old need to believe in the "good" but misled king.
Buchanan's ideology does have inconsistencies, as Kazin points out, and it's unlikely that any future Republican or conservative leadership would follow him in everything. The "Old Right" package never persuaded a majority of Americans and didn't provide workable answers to foreign policy. But the ability of leaders like Reagan to win over those with more realist or non-interventionist or continentalist views shouldn't be dismissed. In the past, Republicans showed much skill in uniting disparate groups under the same banner, and their ability to do so seemed to be in question in the last few years when this book was written. The outlook has gotten brighter for the Bush Administration in the last few weeks, but whether that will last isn't yet clear.
Who was or is the John Birch society? I've heard the name, but don't know anything about them. What did they do and whats the bad thing about them?
Oh, you mean the people who believe in a limited government that is not quite so limited that it can't provide them a job?
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.