Posted on 08/02/2002 2:40:49 PM PDT by jbstrick
Hannity just stated on his radio show that he has just about had enough of the conservative cannibals on this board. To many threads end up being ledd about news and information and more about attacking fellow conservatives.
He said if he wants to get attacked he will go to a Liberal board.
I have a tendency to agree...
You don't specify what I should explain so I'll assume it's the comment about my opinion that Buchanan is a crypto-fascist populist paranoia pimp.
Well, the populist-paranoia-pimp part is self-explanatory and self-evident.
As for the crypto-fascist part:
(1) The likes of the late William Pierce, the guy who runs that neo-Nazi uber-site and the guy who formerly published Spotlight have all written approvingly of Pat Buchanan and his views and…
(2) Buchanan has written approvingly of the late Generalissimo Francisco Franco.
Since neo-Nazis and white supremacists approve of Pat Buchanan and Pat Buchanan approves of a fascist dictator ipso facto Pat buchanan is close enough to being a crypto-fascist to convince most rational and thoughtful people.
However if you prefer the term proto-fascist I won't argue with you.
As for engaging in a lengthy debate to justify my political philosophy, some other time.
I have two web sites to feed and besides, I have been at this game too long to be manuvered into a position where I have to justify every opinioin, provide documentartion for every assertion and define every term.
If, with a wave of Gods hand, the US woke up tomorrow divided neatly, cleanly, and peacably into two nations, one containing all democrats, the other all republicans, and not a single memory existed of us as one nation...
...we would be at war within a years time, each side the others epitome of evil, just like the cold war.
Thats the reality now, thats how far we've come. Its not about parties, its about communism.
You're right. (We didn't like the farm subsidies either, and we didn't like his "pre" 9/11 immigration policies,. hopefully, he won't go back to them. But I see Sen. Hatch out there pushing forward an immigration policy, and though I haven't had enough time to study it, it has its merits, and its pitfalls).
Politics has always been a give and take situation. That's how our different political parties survive. We would live under a dictatorship or a Monarchy if we didn't have a Republic guided by a democratic "form" of governing.
I don't like it at times, and even find it frustrating on occassion. Yet I still marvel at how well it ends up working. "Despite" our differences!! So far.. it is the best form of government on this earth! God Bless it!!
Food on the table.
A roof over your head.
A job.
401k.
Your knee biters education.
The phone bill.
The utility bill.
Medical bills.
Your spouse's job.
Credit card bills.
1001 on the list for many Americans, is the war on terror.
It falls between emptying the cat box and Orange glow on the kitchen cabinets.
Yep, back to Oprah and the long sleep.
To all: Why should prominent conservatives who have been friends of FR continue to associate themselves with FR when they are vicously torn apart by FReepers?
We crapped all over Matt Drudge even though he was responsible for so many of us finding this forum; Rush Limbaugh was (and still is) trashed regularly, even though he gave FR's March for Justice great publicity on his radio show; threads about longtime friends of FR Alan Keyes and Judicial Watch are routinely allowed to be trashed and then end up being removed because of flame wars that make this little dust up I was admonished for seem like a tea party.
There are plenty of longterm FReepers who have walked away or just stopped posting as much because of the dearth of constructive, informative discussions and the pack dog mentality of some posters who have free rein to violate the no personal attack rule.
I'm not talking about the occasional flame, nor am I saying that these folks should be above criticism. But to have people who have been good to FR routinely smeared and trashed has hurt FR's reputation among some prominent and influential conservatives who have been our friends. And that's a (sad) fact.
I disagree with you on several points. It has been my observation that very few liberals are proud enough of their one-world-globalist-neofacistic-neosocialist idealism to admit it.
I hard-right wingnut. You loney left. Where Jane?
Quite a few conservative intellectuals have "written approvingly" of the late General, including the great Erik von Kuehnelt Leddihnn, who as an Austrian count who lived through both WWI and WWII was *anything* but a fascist.
When did so many self-professed conservatives start worshipping at the altar of the corporation? Most of the fathers of the modern conservative movement knew that the corporation could become just as powerful an enemy of Liberty as the State.
You've been reading The New American again haven't you?
I'll take the VAST majority of market share in the realm of hate radio ;) , books , and the web anytime ! He is a conservative , in spite of some of these very posters winger .
For the record I happen to know that you are as solid as the the day is long in Sveden -) .
We now return control of this system back to you ......
Haven't you been paying attention to this thread?
The general opinion expressed so far is that I'm a socalist, running-dog, statist, tool of the globalist corporate oppressors of true American patriots.
FYI, "greaseball" is my universal for anybody who calls Bush "Dumbya."
MurryMom is a "greaseball," too.
I don't even remember who I was talking to.
Deal?
This might make you feel safer: 15 years ago, National Review used to give out free copies of the book with a subscription. Buckley was a great friend and admirer of von K-L, once calling him "the world's most interesting man."
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.