Junk Conversation: Rich, Quindlen and Buchanan keep peddling addled logic.

The New York Press ^ | May 25-31, 2005 | Russ Smith

[quidnunc]

America's social fabric, to ape a Times-worthy phrase, is such a jumble today, it's a challenge to choose which brand of political commentator is more full of malarkey. Representing the paranoid left that believes we're living in a theocracy, there's Frank Rich, the op-ed columnist who rises at the Times as the paper's credibility sinks. On the xenophobic right, Pat Buchanan roars about preparing muskets for the invasion of innocent Mexicans while suggesting maybe the U.S. should've let the Europeans get crushed by Hitler.

In his syndicated column of May 21, "Was World War II Worth It?", the aging, increasingly batty Buchanan wrestled with himself over the question of just who was the most "odious tyrant" of the 20th century. He concludes it was Stalin because while Hitler "killed his millions," the Soviet dictator topped that total. Buchanan was using President Bush's speech earlier this month in Latvia when he suggested that FDR and Churchill were snookered by Stalin at Yalta (certainly worthy of debate) as cover to mask the latter's strange isolationism. Ignoring Hitler's threat to the United States, Buchanan writes: "If the objective of the West was the destruction of Nazi Germany, it was a 'smashing' success. But why destroy Hitler? If to liberate Germans, it was not worth it. After all, the Germans voted Hitler in."

Rich, in last Sunday's column, achieved the somewhat remarkable feat of defending Newsweek more vehemently than the magazine itself for the since retracted May 9 brief about U.S. military guards flushing the Koran down the toilet at Guantanamo Bay. Rich says: "The [Bush] administration has been so successful at bullying the news media in order to cover up its own fictions and failings in Iraq that it now believes it can get away with pinning some 17 deaths on an errant single sentence in a 10-sentence Periscope item that few noticed until days after its publication… In its war on the press, this hubristic administration may finally have crossed a bridge too far."

-snip-

[wvobiwan]

Buchanan is just POed that conservatives have rejected him for being a perrenial election loser. Sorry Pat, we prefer someone who can win SOMETIME.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

I didn't reject for losing elections. I rejected him because he's a barking moonbat.

[Who dat?]

Sorry Pat, we prefer someone who can win SOMETIME.

And, having “won,” you end up with Gutless Wonder Bush… that’s an accomplishment. Ha.

You might’ve missed this:

Pat Buchanan roars about preparing muskets for the invasion of innocent Mexicans…

It’s short and easy to miss. Meanwhile, there’s nothing “innocent” about the people invading the U.S. They have spent much time (years and decades, in fact) planning and saving and plotting to intentionally escape and evade the law. I don’t much blame them on the one hand but will NOT approve or encourage their behavior or the behavior of those agitating on their behalf.

Then again, American citizenship – and the rights of American citizens – is/are sufficiently worthless that they give it away - or try to. Yep…

[rcocean]

I just love all these posts on WW II /sarcasm/

What's next? A Russ Smith column on the war of the roses?

[TheGeezer]

After all, the Germans voted Hitler in."

Pat, Pat, Pat, the Germans did a lot of things, but Hitler rode into the Bundestag as part of a minority coalition and then created panic and paranoia to stage a coup.

He wasn't really "voted in".

My ancestors battled Rome and civilization; they regularly invaded Poland when they became depressed; many even looked the other way when the fascists murdered millions of innocent people. But, amazingly, they never literally "voted in Hitler."

[T Lady]

'I just love all these posts on WW II /sarcasm/ '

...Well it sure beats the heck out of the rhapsodizing the Left does over Vietnam, and their fixation on a quagmire for the War on Terror.

-Regards, T.

[Stellar Dendrite]

" And, having “won,” you end up with Gutless Wonder Bush… that’s an accomplishment. Ha."

Yes, a man fighting a so called WOT while leaving our border wide open and giving 50 million to terrorist scum.

[WestVirginiaRebel]

But...but...he was a third party candidate! You know, a real alternative to the mainstream!

[rodguy911]

Pat is a lot like Newt.
Newt has that 80/20 thing going for him. About 80% of the time he makes great sense, the other 20, you need a tin hat or headphones.

Buchanan is a little more unpredictable. He's
down to about 60/40 with a bigger tin hat a full head masks and ear phones for some of his stuff.

[Who dat?]

Yes, a man fighting a so called WOT while leaving our border wide open and giving 50 million to terrorist scum.

I understand and agree, I think. There are logistical problems with border enforcement – I’ll agree with that.

But there are secondary and tertiary efforts that could/should be implemented. They are NOT, for the most part. That’s IMO.

Meanwhile, NO terrorists at Guantanimo Bay have been executed. That tells me a lot. The fact that hundreds have been *released* tells me more. Maybe I’m overly suspicious. Make up your own mind…

[tiamat]

A Balrog of Morgoth wrote:
I didn't reject for losing elections. I rejected him because he's a barking moonbat.

---

Thank you.

[Wilhelm Tell]

Hitler was a convicted terrorist and was thus ineligible to become a German citizen and run for office. But some activist judges found an exucse for the convicted terrorist Hitler to become a German citizen. The leftists should remember that before they rhapsodize about the wonderful "diversity" that criminals bring to society!