Posted on 05/17/2005 6:15:46 AM PDT by sawdust
Pat Buchanan speaks of American conservatism in the past tense. "The conservative movement has passed into history," says the one-time White House aide, three-time presidential candidate, commentator and magazine publisher. "It doesn't exist anymore as a unifying force," he says in an interview with The Washington Times. "There are still a lot of people who are conservative, but the movement is now broken up, crumbled, dismantled." Mr. Buchanan, a former adviser to Presidents Nixon, Ford and Reagan, says conservatism "is at war with itself over foreign policy, over deficit hawks versus supply-siders." Unnamed phonies, he suggests, have infiltrated the movement. There are "a lot of people who call themselves conservative but who, on many issues, I just don't consider as conservative. They are big-government people."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
I don't think Pat really understands what conservatism is. It was never a fascist movement, nor was it a movement that Pat could turn into fascists. It's the same misunderstanding alot of ignorant lefties have. That's why he's frustrated.
"folks who consider themselves small-l libertarians or, more recently, South Park conservatives are, in my opinion, far more conservative than your typical mainstream Republican."
The label "Conservative" is too hard to define. It doesn't really mean anything in the literal sense. If by conservative you mean the roots of the conservative movement from the days of Goldwater, then yes... libertarians are alot more conservative.
Just catching up to this post, but you hit it right on the head. Perfect description. Pat Buchanan is by no means a small-government person, except perhaps in his vivid imagination.
You gotta quit drinking the battery acid...Most Buchananites voted for Bush to keep Kerry out of office...A lot of conservative leaning Democrats voted for Bush to keep Kerry out...There isn't enough of a Republican, let alone conservative base to elect a Republican President...
You don't have a clue how many people support American sovereignty as well as Buchanan's ideals...But I have a feeling you're going to find out come next election...
I believe Pat is right about a lot of big shots in the Republican party are Pro Abortion. That IS a problem. ON the other hand, the RNC 2004, was the biggest can of butt wupp ever opened up on the Dems. When McCain called out Moore(on), when Zell Miller gave that tremendous Marine Corp Figting Spirit, well wew,, that was beeeeeeutifull.
As long as we keep that fighting Spirit we showed in the RNC, we will lead the way.
LOL! You have my vote for the stupidest thing said on this forum since I've been here.
I think most liberal/socialist, big government, profiteering, political opportunists feel that way.
Open your eyes.He is being positive, positive about the need for a conservative movement to re-emerge within our nation. The conservative elements of our nation are often times very questionable. Few of the current conservative leaders would fit in with Reagan's political philosophy.
I think that's why we have the Constitution, which is a moral document -- which combines both Christian morals with Enlightenment philosophy -- you're right -- it is a moral stance -- but the only moral stance I care about is already layed out in the Constitution. It is, of course, lucky that we have a morality spelled out for us.
Agreed, our constitution enshrines a moral view rooted in the understanding of human dignity endowed by our creator. That dignity can only be realized by the excercise of free will, which is why such a moral view allows VERY little room for coercion. Just because something in moral does not mean that it should be politically mandated, or that which is immoral politically prohibited. (Laws against force or fraud being the exception)
I do; exactly one percent.
Guess you have to be "cute" to get elected to office now that women are the majority in the USA. Great from now on with will have "cute" presidents like W, I kinda like to return to electing the best man, not the prettiest.
He ought to know, he's the one fueling it and leading the extremist in third parties.
Go Pat Go!
Speaking the truth.
Too bad he's just casting pearls before swine.
Power? Winning?
Does principle factor into your equation in any way?
Or is politics to you some kind of perpetual NFL?
I am neither liberal, socialist, or in favor of big government. Nor am I a "profiteering political opportunist". I figure that if conservatives and Republicans were thought to be synonomous, it would only be because conservatives had quit fighting for conservative postions among Republicans; because there is no way in a real world for all Republicans to be conservative. If conservatives ever believe they have reached that point, they will be in acceptance of a myth and no longer fighting for conservative positions. At that point, Buchanan's current lament would come to pass.
Some might say that a guy who aligns himself with a Black Power, lesbian, Marxist is "anti-conservative". Apparently no Buchanan cultist will admit it though.
Perhaps the resistance to giving women the right to vote was indeed a logical step to preserving our republic. Just a thought.
Great from now on with will have "cute" presidents like W, I kinda like to return to electing the best man, not the prettiest.
Those who live in "fantasy land" don't seem to agree. They obviously do not mind being duped.
I'm sorry. Perhaps you are just confused.
Ye gads...you beat me to it. :) I was reading that and the same thought came to mind... For heaven's sakes Pat shut the heck up. He has NOTHING constructive to say and he is constantly negative on everything. I'm sick of hearing his tidbits of nothingness. He's sooooo passe.!
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.