So you are the defining authority now? Well, in respect to the request that we not trash one another, I will let that go. But why can't you simply discipline yourself to discuss the particular idea to which you take exception, in an appropriate thread, without engaging in the ad hominen attack? Both Bucahnan and Browne give their reasons for their stated views. You do not feel that you can argue for or against those reasons without trying to besmirch the man?
I wish you could step back and see how this nasty backbiting against reasoning men, over differences on isolated issues, diminishes the appeal of Conservatism to the vast, really uncommitted legions of the poorly informed, general citizenry.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
No, I'm just pointing out that the classical definition of Conservative doesn't fit Buchana (Fascist) or "that Liberarian guy" (Nihilist).
Conservatives are defined by what they are FOR, not what they are AGAINST, which is the only thing these two have to spout off about.
IOW, don't tell me that certain people are "sacrosanct" and immune from criticism, especially when it is clear from their own stances, that they are far, far out on the fringe.
Buchanan and that other guy are part of what's WRONG, not the solution.