Posted on 05/28/2005 8:38:38 AM PDT by kjvail
Edited on 05/28/2005 8:57:11 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
BILL O'REILLY, HOST: In "The Great Debate" segment tonight, conservative commentator Pat Buchanan (search), who works at a television network I can't remember the name of, has a new book out called "Where the Right Went Wrong: How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Administration and Hijacked the Bush Presidency." Wow, what a title.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Say what you want about Mr . Buchanan's foreign policy position but I do believe he has this one nailed.
If Pat wants to give up on the fight, let him, it's up to all of us to keep it moving. (because it's the RIGHT thing to do)
Me too. And he's no slacker on foreign policy, either.
I'm assuming this is just a video of two self-important jerks yelling at one another.
"I do believe he has this one nailed."
me three!
"I'm assuming this is just a video of two self-important jerks yelling at one another."
You might also consider it to be a discussion between a PC host and an abjective non-revisionist guest.
I follow this reasoning and am equally confused, why in God's name are these freaks destroying this society? there is no advantage, so why would it be intentional? It is truly dumbfounding to me. Drugs, permisivness and filth are destroying this society so we may as well leave the borders open as we are gonna' end up like those crap holes to the south of us anyway. Just a matter of time.
"Neo-conservatists have pursued open borders, amnesty for illegal aliesn, free trade, an orderly retreat in the culture wars, Big Government Conservatism and Wilsonian interventions to reshape the world."
Pat hits it out of the park for America.
"O"bjective, sorry
He is a conservative which is not necessarily synomous with Republican. If the Republican party is no longer conservative by any meaningful definition of the term then why be a member?
No yelling, they actually seem to agree.
bump
Hello,
I haven't watched this but if you do some research on the frankfurt school, it's founders, antonio gramsci, you will get the picture. The communist manifesto works as well.
The goal is to play up degeneracy, promiscuity, easy divorce, etc etc to abolish the family unit. By abolishing the family unit, the state gains more control over individuals.
Here's a start:
'The Origins of Political Correctness"
http://www.academia.org/lectures/lind1.html
Communist goals from the 1963 congressional record
http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm
Highlights include:
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks. [The NEA, etc]
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state." [THE ACLU!!]
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents. [One current example is the case against parental notification for abortion]
Similar to "we had to destroy the village to save it"?
Hope to see you and other Viet Nam vets tomorrow at Rolling Thunder (if I interpreted your screen name correctly!)
IMO.....There is no single reason but from a philosophical standpoint these new philosophies stem from the idea that if wrongs have occurred under any particular system, that system or philosophy must also be wrong. This might partly explain the unwillingness of the leftist to acknowledge the horrors and inhumanity of communism, they would then have to dump that philosophy. Instead they just rename and tinker, socialism, progressive, etc. Also many people see only power and profit from such "transition" and deconstruction and we all know that by human nature these concepts are ever present. The bottom line to me is clear, In order to build a new world, the entire old way of thinking must be replaced, this they believe can be achieved because "science" in their minds has proven that nurture is truth and not nature. Thus to them it should be easy to re-tool peoples thinking to create the perfect platonic society......Or they are just plain idiots.
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.