An un-American conservative

Jerusalem Post ^ | Apr. 13, 2003 | IRVING LOUIS HOROWITZ

[hchutch]

I'll support it as long as the Palestinians live up to their end, but at this point, I could bet the first, second, and THIRD mortgages on them violating the agreement based on past performance.

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Maybe MSNBC can give him his own spot to trash Bush on. Why not?

[ex-snook]

fair enough. But I want us on the border to verify. And if we confirm, we should take military action and not the Israelis.

[Poohbah]

I loyally support the President's Two State solution, do you?

I support the concept, and I support its execution if the Palestinians and Israelis live up to the agreement. However, I would not bet any money I couldn't afford to lose on the Palestinians actually doing this.

And you seem to support it at the expense of US security interests. Rewarding terrorists for their bad behavior is NOT a vital US national security interest, at least the last time I checked.

You're definitely making the case for your apparently having divided loyalties.

[Poohbah]

And if we confirm, we should take military action and not the Israelis.

And you seem to be reliably able to rationalize away Palestinian violations and find an excuse to not take any action over them.

[ex-snook]

Poo you need a reading lesson. My first and only loyalty is to the United States. The US interests are expressed by the President in his two-state position. Is your loyalty first and only to the US?

[nanny]

I liked your post.

Now I think the anti-Buchanan crowd protests a little too much. We always hear, "he is irrelevant" "he is not important", etc., etc., If this were true, there would not be so many hit jobs on him and the reactions would not be so venomous.

I don't know about his stand on Israel - but I do like his stand on immigration and forgive me - but your dadgummed right I want our government to put American first. Not ashamed of that - nope not one teeny weeny bit. I don't care if it bothers the one-worlders, the so called 'free traders' - or the big corporation contributors to both parties.

If someone wants to debate Buchanan's ideas OK, but to decide that only white, American born, racist people believe this way is very dangerous thinking.

If you disagree with his ideas - say so and debate them. But to use and to condone someone else using the politicies of division and race baiting is despicable. Remember if they use it on anyone - it can be used on you also. Believe me, for those who have principles and are willing to stand up for them and not bend with the wind, you could be on the receiving end of this whip someday. When you are, remember you helped fashion and strengthen it by using it when it suited your fancy.

[dighton]

How's this?

[Poohbah]

Poo you need a reading lesson.

No, you do.

You've said that you believe that the Palestinians will live up to their end of the agreement, despite not having any track record of doing so--and you never got around to answering my question as to why you had such amazing faith in the Palestinians.

My first and only loyalty is to the United States.

Uh-huh, sure. Your willingness to spin Palestinian behavior leads me to question the sincerity behind that statement.

The US interests are expressed by the President in his two-state position.

In all of its detail, including (make sure you're sitting down) the Palestinians actually recognizing Israel's right to exist in peace...which has never happened, despite many solemn promises in multiple "peace process" agreements that it would happen RSN or ADN.

Is your loyalty first and only to the US?

Yes. However, your first loyalty seems to be to Chairman Arafat, since you insist on pursuing Arafat's agenda and not the agenda of the United States.

[skeeter]

The Palistinians already have their own country - its called Jordan.

And I despise neocons.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Ho hum! Folks like Pat Buchanan and Joe Sobran have become irrelevant among conservative thinkers in America.

Which conservative thinkers or leaders are you referring to?

[Joe Hadenuf]

the Grand Old Party that nurtured him but now sees fit to live without him.

Interesting, and I thought Buchanan left the Republican party. I had no idea the Republicans threw Buchanan out of that party.

[Captain Beyond]

It sounds more like the author needs to refrain from calling Miss Cleo of the physic friends network for advice on the future of American politics. The only problem with his article is that Patrick Buchanan is irrelevant to modern day conservatism. Nobody is buying his magazine let alone paying any attention to what he is espousing. The hand full that are do nothing more than serve as token icons for the left to hold up and try to tar the right with. PJB is totally out to lunch when it comes to political vision in trying to obtain political office.

[Poohbah]

Nobody is buying his magazine let alone paying any attention to what he is espousing.

You sure about the "no one" part?

It would be music to my ears...

[Captain Beyond]

I'm saying in overall performance the sells are not blowing the doors off Newsweek, Time, etc. PJB at times has written good columns and has had good commentary but when he engages in political action it is a disaster. For the author to think that PJB is a role model for future politics is preposterous.

[Poohbah]

I seem to recall that they said the same thing about this Austrian ex-corporal in 1920s Germany.

[bob808]

Buchanan's biggest problem is that he understands the Constitution better than most neo-cons... and in the face of opposition that contains heavy doses of ignorance and arrogance he continues to persevere.

Bump to that!

[Captain Beyond]

If you see America as 1930's Germany then get out while you can. But the majority of us will stay and make sure that doesn't happen here and continue to live in liberty and peace. American will remain free as long as the Constitution is law and we remember history.

[x]

This is a very bizarre article when you consider that Transaction Publishers, which Horowitz heads, has published several paleoconservative books in recent years and provided space in its magazine "Society" for Paul Gottfried and other paleo authors. Certainly paleos have had more of an "in" with Horowitz's outfit than with most other magazines or publishing houses. Keeping that in mind it's hard to take Horowitz's charges seriously. If he thought they were fascistically inclined, why publish them all this time?

It's hard to recognize Buchanan's magazine in what Horowitz writes. Buchanan is critical of Bush, but that hardly amounts to "unrelenting hatred." This article looks like another example of the heated emotions of the day rather than a serious analysis of "paleoconservatism" or "The American Conservative."