Pat Buchanan is no Ronald Reagan. In fact, Pat Buchanan has come out against the economic policies of Ronald Reagan.
In his own words, Buchanan states: Reaganism and its twin sister, Thatcherism, create fortunes among the highly educated, but in the middle and working classes, they generate anxiety, insecurity and disparities in income. Since these classes seek stability, security and order from their political systems, above all else, Thatcherism and Reaganism thus undermine the very social structure on which they were built...
The attempt to impose Reaganomics in Europe has also brought backlash, as the jobless rate has risen above 12 percent. Conservative parties have been ousted in Canada, Britain, France and the United States, and the German conservatives are now running behind the socialists....
In Asia, Reaganism was always paid lip service as the giants, China and Japan, embraced nationalism. Asia's tigers grew fat by feeding on the U.S. market, while protecting their own. Their reward: a U.S. merchandise trade deficit running in January at $225 billion a year.
Unbridled capitalism is also an awesome destructive force. It makes men and women obsolete as rapidly as it does the products they produce and the plants that employ them. And the people made obsolete and insecure are workers, employees, "Reagan Democrats," rooted people, conservative people who want to live their lives and raise their families in the same neighborhoods they grew up in.
Unbridled capitalism tells them they cannot.
---------------------------------------------------------------
If Buchanan is a Reagan-like conservative, then why does he advocate postitions that are antithetical to the policies of Ronald Reagan? And why does he blame the policies of Ronald Reagan for "generating anxiety, insecurity and disparities in income"?
(And I would be happy to hear you defend Buchanan on his deisel fuel comments.)
1)Because he is "Reagan-like", not Reagan cloned.
2)Because conservatives have a healthy perspective on the natural state of man and therefore can admire those with whom they feel a kinship without mistaking them for Gods or agents of God.
BTW, thanks for posting and interesting picture of Pat's populist side.
I would not delve into any of the concentration camp topics! When did I give you the idea that I am conversationally suicidal? ;o)
I would refer you to Mr. Google. There's enough material there to give you food for thought for some months. (Pat didn't just pick these questions up out of thin air, for heaven's sake).
Speaking of Google ... I found this article made some interesting points:
http://home.ddc.net/ygg/rj/rj-03.htm