Posted on 08/29/2011 4:57:57 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Pat Buchanan regularly serves as Morning Joe's lone conservative in the show's self-described 10:1 ratio of lib to conservative guests. But Buchanan this morning demonstrated that he is anything but a Republican partisan.
Sounding more like Barney Frank after a bad night's sleep, Buchanan blasted President George W. Bush, claiming 43 "broke the Republican party and frankly he broke the United States as a superpower." View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
That and then the housing bubble ponzi economy.
There is still lots of denial by some as to how much trouble Iraq caused Republicans and helped Democrats, especially the mess from 2005 to 2006 before the surge. You had trouble finding a positive story on even FNC by 2006. McCain thought he would run by being for the successful surge that Obama opposed and then the economy completely blew up in fall 2008 giving Democrats a huge gift.
All bad memories for me.
Here's the 'compassionate' reform Bush was successful at:
Bush pushes minority homeownership (FR post | June 15, 2002 | By KATHY A. GAMBRELL)
Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership (FR post USA Today ^ | 1-20-04 | Thomas Fogarty )
" GWB 2002 Speech :”More and more people own their homes in America today. Yet we have a problem here in America because fewer than half the Hispanics and African Americans own their own homes. That’s a home ownership gap; a gap that we got to work together to close. And by the end of this decade we’ll increase the number of minority homeowners (future Obama voters ) by 5.5 million families. “ “One of the major obstacles to minority home-ownership is financing. Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac (who I will bail out in 2008) have committed to provide more money for lenders, they committed to meet the shortage of capital available for minority home-buyers. Freddie Mac just began 25 initiatives around the country to dismantle barriers (like income requirements) and create better opportunities for home-ownership. One of the programs is designed to help families with bad credit histories to qualify for home ownership loans (by faking their income) . You don’t have to have a lousy home for first time home-buyers. You put your mind to it the first time low income home buyer can have just as nice a house as anyone else (till those adjustable rates go up). “ "
President Bush Mortgage Speech 2002(Helping those w bad credit buy houses)
The minority party in the House cannot ‘block’ anything, I am amazed he posts such nonsense.
Well done.
Well done.
As always, Buchanan is absolutely right.
Buchanan has a track record of being consistently proved right ...
(1) Buchanan was right about our inability to afford the foreign wars.
(2) Buchanan was right about the importance of the culture war.
(3) Buchanan was right about immigration.
(4) Buchanan was right that George W. Bush was destroying the Republican Party with his push for “comprehensive immigration reform” with Ted Kennedy.
(5) Buchanan was right about “free trade agreements.”
George W. Bush attempted to put his secretary on the Supreme Court. His greatest legacy is Barack Hussein Obama.
Buchanan has never been more relevant.
Everything that Buchanan has been saying for decades has come true. Just look at Greece and the chaos in Europe. Pat called that one back in 2001 with “Death of the West.”
Instead of getting Buchanan as president, who would have secured the border 15 years ago, we got Bob Dole and George W. Bush, and because people were so sick and tired of Bush, we got Barack Hussein Obama.
Suppose Buchanan had won back in the 1990s. Would China have all our industry? Would 1/3 of Mexico be in the United States? Would we be tottering on the verge of bankruptcy?
Unlikely.
George W. Bush wasn’t a conservative. He was a creature of the Republican establishment.
Pat Buchanan is a real conservative. A real conservative is educated and knows a thing or two about culture and history. A real conservative is a statesman who cares more about future generations (and previous generations) than political expediency.
Thanks to W., my generation has a national debt that will cripple our entire nation before we even get our chance to prosper.
Thanks, they been trying to sell this 'Bush tried to save us from CRA' crap since late 2008 and it is so easy to do a simple search of the internet to prove it is nonsense.
My favorite is claiming Democrat minority in House 'blocked' reform, What House procedure allows the minority to 'block' anything? only true Koolaid drinkers would buy such nonsense.
So Iraq is a “democracy”?
Why should I care? How does that affect me? I don’t give a damn if Saddam Hussein is over there or not. What I really care about is how much those stupid wars over there have cost.
How much did they cost? How much money did we borrow from China to pay for those stupid wars?
Who will pay for those wars? Oh wait ... it is young people, our generation, who will get to pay for those wars and the interest on those wars too.
I will go back and listen to his convention speech again.
I was hooting and hollering at the TV back in the day. I also turned to my wife and said, he will never be elected to anything now.
I like Pat.
Sometimes your crazy uncle is right. It doesn’t make him less crazy though.
A well done to you sir.
Wonder what msnbc pays Pat to wollow in his own failed presidential candidate bile?
It’s a fun and games until someone brings down a few buildings or threatens the oil supply.
George W. Bush was the reason that Obama owned the Millennial vote in 2008.
There is nothing whatsoever “conservative” about George W. Bush and his minion Karl Rove. It was Rove who destroyed the Republican Party in 2006 and 2008 with his liberal policies - who lost the House and Senate to the Democrats, and the White House to Obama, which put Sotomayor and Kagan on the SCOTUS.
The only reason the GOP has come back since 2008 is because grassroots conservatives began to repudiate the Bush/Rove/Washington establishment legacy - invade the world, invite the world, in hock to the world.
That is the Rove Grand Strategy - endless wars that will fiscally haunt future generations, shipping our industry overseas to China for Wall Street millionaires can live like aristocrats in the Hamptons, and finally lets not forget inviting the entire world to move to the United States to get on the welfare state and to push Americans out of their own neighborhoods.
Don’t disagree about W.
Pat is more of an isolationist than he is conservative.
I’m glad Buchanan is on television.
He is the only mainstream pundit (aside from Mark Steyn) who has a clue about the challenges we will face over the next twenty years.
Yes, Buchanan lost to W. Thank God.
Thank God, we got W. and Rove, whose brilliance can be seen in Barack Hussein Obama who now sits in the White House, in Harry Reid who controls the U.S. Senate.
The GOP establishment is so wise: “Poppy” Bush, Bob Dole, W. Act 1, W. Act 2, Juan McCain ... with this kind of leadership, America is on the “Edge of Glory” in 2011.
Maybe we need Trent Lott to come back and take over the Senate. He need Rove back in charge. Someone run Bob Dole again in 2012 or failing that lets rally behind Mitt Romney or Jon Huntsman.
(1) First, Buchanan specifically warned about just that scenario in his book, “A Republic, Not an Empire.”
(2) After the Cold War, Buchanan wanted to bring the troops home and get rid of the useless NATO, but the Washington establishment wanted to continue playing Age of Empires in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia.
(3) On 9/11, Buchanan’s prophecy came true. Yes, Buchanan had specifically warned that something like that would happen, because the Washington establishment was playing Risk over there in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and Egypt, and were stirring up the Muslims against the U.S.
(4) So we spent the next decade squandering our wealth on useless wars that could have been prevented if people like Poppy Bush and Bob Dole and Bill Clinton hadn’t been in charge in Washington.
(5) As Buchanan pointed out at the time, 9/11 (as tragic as it was) was not the real challenge facing the U.S. No, the real challenge was coming up in the 2010s and the 2020s and the 2030s.
(4) So now, here we are in the 2010s, and the scenario that Buchanan described in “Death of the West” is finally coming true in Europe, right on schedule.
(5) Mark Steyn describes that scenario in his new book about America and his previous one about Europe.
(6) As for the notion that W. protected us from terrorism, where was Dubya warning about that issue before 9/11? Did Dubya campaign on that issue in 2000?
Again, it was Buchanan that had predicted 9/11 before it happened. It was Buchanan that had predicted what globalization would lead to. It was Buchanan that predicted the costs of the foreign wars.
Above all else, it was Buchanan that predicted where multiculturalism, diversity, immigration, and affirmative action would take us as a nation.
Poppy Bush, Bob Dole, Dubya, and Juan McCain aren’t fit to shine the shoes of Pat Buchanan. History will vindicate Buchanan.
In fact, history is vindicating Buchanan right now in Europe and America. It always does. Because Buchanan is a real conservative who thinks less of the present than of the past and the future.
A real conservative can tell a fake conservative from a real one in a New York minute.
What is the meaning of this word “isolationist”?
It means someone who puts the interests of the United States first, right? Someone who puts the interests of future generations of Americans above the interests of France, above the interests of South Korea, above the interests of Saudi Arabia, above the interests of the U.N., NATO, the World Bank.
The word “isolationist” is a myth. The United States in all of its history has never been “isolationist.” In the so-called “isolationist” period of American history, we traded with the entire world and intervened everywhere from Panama to Japan.
In the worldview of the Washington establishment, being an “isolationist” means being a “nationalist,” being someone who rejects the post-WW2 liberal consensus of globalism.
What is “globalism”? Is that conservative? In what way is globalism conservative? Woodrow Wilson and FDR and LBJ were conservatives?
Of course they weren’t. The JFK/LBJ/Nixon policy of sending Americans to their death in Vietnam wasn’t “conservative” at all.
“Isolationist” is merely an epithet. It is not a serious description of public policy. George Washington wasn’t an “isolationist.” He was just a statesman like Buchanan who avoided (as a matter of principle) stupid, useless foreign conflicts.
If the neocons had been in power in the 1790s, they would have demanded America intervene on behalf of the French Revolution, in the name of “conservatism”!
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.