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 ...
I’m sorry .. that doesn’t make him a conservative.
Pat is a fool, obviously, but it’s disappointing so many “Freepers” are agreeing with him and the national media that Bush was a horrible president.
Who did all you haters vote for again? Disgraceful.
Buchanan is an idiot, well past his prime.
Did anyone see the Bush interview re: 9/11 on National Geographic last night? Excellent.
On Judicial appointments alone your “Hate Bush Always” dogma is proven idiotic and ignorant.
Pure nonsense.
No. Not by a long shot! It's hard to decide, but his biggest fault was either (1) SPENDING more of the American working man and woman's hard earned money than any President since Lyndon Johnson or (2) INCREASING the burden of entitlements on the same working man and woman or (3) REFUSING to enforce U.S. immigration laws IN VIOLATION of his oath of office to uphold U.S. law.
"Poor on spending, and terrible on illegal immigration" indeed!
I repeat: He's one of the worst Presidents in U.S. history--and this from one of his--FORMER--most enthusiastic and loyal supporters.
One of the stupidest things he did was alienate US--us who had worked for him, campagned for him, praised him (here on FR and elsewhere), and even nominated him for Mount Rushmore! He had to go WAY out of this way to do that, but he managed to do it.
Just take an honest look at the facts! Bush was a FAILURE!
Fall 2008 before the election McCain went on The View to be seen by female voters I guess, and the subject of the SCOTUS naturally came up. Whoopie Goldberg told McCain that a 'strict construction' of the constitution would re-impose slavery. Mccain's response??? "I respectfully disagree"
My point is that Republicans have never been any good at explaining why liberals justices are so bad for this country. They cant even explain why the above is non-sense, and Bachman didnt help any on that subject when she talked about it. They need to take a course lecture given by justice Scalia on how to explain it. He is the only one I have ever seen that can articulate it well.
As usual you ignore the fact that both Bush and McCain tried to reform but were blocked by Barny Frank in he House and Chris Dood (both Democrats) in the Senate.
But I know, actually having to hold your idols in the Democrat party accountable for THEIR actions is far to hard for you. So much easier to spend all your time shooting your political allies in the back instead.
And then you wonder why you get your political butt kicked on issue after issue?
W did tremendous damage to the GOP. If you doubt it just compare how you feel about the party today compared to 10 years ago. A decade ago I would have argued with anyone who said that the democrats wanted to rush headlong into socialism while the GOP just wanted to stroll there. No longer.
And a complete inability to evaluate the facts on yours.
AHH, yes....Harriet Myers ('Trust me on her wink..wink..')
Amnesty See you at the signing.
“Truth be told, it was inevitable that the US would be broke as a superpower with its continued insistence to be the world’s policeman and mounting national debt.”
Exactly. Why Bush and Bushites think the U.S. has to bankroll every military intervention in every hellhole the world over is beyond me. Nonstop wars, costing hundreds of billions, with nothing to show for it but mountains of debt on the backs of our grandchildren.
And, of course, we just had to have a new FDR/LBJ “entitlement program”, so Bush pushes MediPill. Spending skyrocketed during Bush’s presidency, even during the years with a Republican House and Senate.
And don’t get me started on Bush’s amnesty pushes.
If this is the genuis produced by Harvard and Yale, let’s elect a graduate from a community college instead.
Buchanan is right about Bush.
Mindlessly regurgitating the slogans screamed at you daily by never been anything Talk Radio hosts is childish. Try learning some facts, instead of talking points, for a change.
Nope, the wrong judgment here is the Do Nothing’s failure to learn a single fact about Iraq that doesn't validate their preconceived emotion based political dogmas.
Why Iraq
One of the really infuriating things in modern politics is the level of disinformation, misinformation, demagoguery and out right lying going on about the mission in Iraq. Democrats have spent the last 3+ years lying about Iraq out of a political calculation. The assumption is that the natural isolationist mindset of the average American voter, linked to the inherent Anti Americanism (what is misnamed the “Anti War movement”) of the more feverish Democrat activists (especially those running the US’s National “News” media) would restore them to national political dominance. The truth is the Democrat Party Leadership has simply lacked the courage to speak truth to whiners. The truth is that even if Al Gore won the 2000 election and 09-11 still happened we would be doing the EXACT same things in Iraq we are doing now.
Based on the political situation in the region left over from the 1991 Gulf War plus the domestic political consensus built up in BOTH parties since 1991 as well as fundamental military strategic laws, there was NO viable strategic choice for the US but to take out Iraq after finishing the initial operations in Afghanistan.
To start with Saddam's Iraq was our most immediate threat. We could NOT commit significant military forces to another battle with Saddam hovering undefeated on our flank nor could we leave significant forces watching Saddam. The political containment of Iraq was breaking down. That what Oil for Food was all about. Oil for Food was an attempt by Iraq to break out of it's diplomatic isolation and slip the shackles the UN Sanctions put on it's military. There there was the US Strategic position to consider.
The War on Islamic Fascism is different sort of war. in facing this Asymmetrical threat, we have a hidden foe, spread out across a geographically diverse area, with covert sources of supply. Since we cannot go everywhere they hide out, in fact often cannot even locate them until the engage us, we need to draw them out of hiding into a kill zone.
Iraq is that kill zone. That is the true brilliance of the Iraq strategy. We draw the terrorists out of their world wide hiding places onto a battlefield they have to fight on for political reasons (The “Holy” soil of the Arabian peninsula) where they have to pit their weakest ability (Conventional Military combat power) against our greatest strength (ability to call down unbelievable amounts of firepower) where they will primarily have to fight other forces (the Iraqi Security forces) in a battlefield that is mostly neutral in terms of guerrilla warfare. (Iraqi-mostly open terrain as opposed to guerrilla friendly areas like the mountains of Afghanistan or the jungles of SE Asia).
Did any of the critics of liberating Iraq ever look at a map? Iraq, for which we had the political, legal and moral justifications to attack, is the strategic high ground of the Middle East. A Geographic barrier that severs ground communication between Iran and Syria apart as well as providing another front of attack in either state or into Saudi Arabia if needed.
There were other reasons to do Iraq but here is the strategic military reason we are in Iraq. We have taken, an maintain the initiative from the Terrorists. They are playing OUR game on ground of OUR choosing.
Problem is Counter Insurgency is SLOW and painful. Often a case of 3 steps forward, two steps back. One has to wonder if the American people have either the emotional maturity, nor the intellect” to understand. It's so much easier to spew made for TV slogans like “No Blood for Oil” or “We support the Troops, bring them home” or dumbest of all “We are creating terrorists” then to actually THINK.
Westerners in general, and the US citizens in particular seem to have trouble grasping the fundamental fact of this foe. These Islamic Fascists have NO desire to co-exist with them. The extremists see all this PC posturing by the Hysteric Left as a sign that we are weak. Since they want us dead, weakness encourages them. There is simply no way to coexist with people who completely believe their “god” will reward them for killing us.
So we can covert to Islam, die or kill them. Iraq is about killing enough of them to make the rest of the Jihadists realize we are serious. They same way killing enough Germans, Italians and Japanese eliminated the ideologies of Nazism, Fascism and Bushido.
Americans need to understand how Bin Laden and his ilk view us. In the Arab world the USA is considered a big wimp. We have run away so many times. Lebanon, the Kurds, the Iraqis in 1991, the Iranians, Somalia, Clinton all thru the 1990s etc etc etc. The Jihadists think we will run again. In fact they are counting on it. That way they can run around screaming “We beat the American just like the Russians, come join us in Jihad” and recruit the next round of “holy warriors”. Iraq is also a show place where we show the Muslim world that there are a lines they cannot cross. On 9-11-01 they crossed that line and we can, and will, destroy them for it -
If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”
Winston Churchill
Frank 'blocked' reform in a Republican controlled house? Do you know how silly your excuse is? Anyone that know a little about congress operation knows that is nonsense. How can you even post such nonesense and expect to be taken serious??
Speaking of reforms, here's some Bush ones:
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 )
President Bush Mortgage Speech 2002(Helping those w bad credit buy houses)
Compassional conservative was proved to be a huge failure under Bush as all those minorities voted Democrat by 2008 after they lost all those homes promoted above.
Bush was a RINO’s RINO and I happen to agree: he did break the Republican Party (not that they weren’t already headed that way), Plus Bush’s POLICIES (and McCain) led TO OBAMA!
So, yes I agree with Buchannan in this instance-and no I’m not a Rino anyone that defends GWB IS!!
” Amnesty See you at the signing. “
I will remember that till I die.
When Pelosi won, bush said “ Maybe we can finally do something about “comprehensive immigration reform “.
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.