ZOT! Can there be a serious challenge to Bush in the GOP primaries?

John Buchanan is a journalist and magazine writer based in Miami Beach ^ | november 29, 2003 | john buchanan

[Republican Challenger]

I am a nationally published journalist who has been drafted to challenge George W. Bush in the Republican Presidential primaries, beginning in New Hampshire on January 27. My aim is to prompt legitimate debate and genuine new ideas, but I start with a question:

HAS GEORGE W. BUSH BETRAYED TRADITIONAL GOP VALUES?

He has failed in his promise to control spending. Nondefense spending has skyrocketed under Bush. The Congressional Budget Office reported that for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003, nondefense spending rose 7% – nearly double the 4% discretionary spending caps Bush promised to enforce (Source: Washington Times). Since Bush took office, nondefense spending has leapt 13% -- 21% if spending on the war on terrorism is included. “My impression of Bush,” says Chris Edwards, director of fiscal policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, “is that I’ve never seen him give a speech in which he says government is too big and we need to cut costs.”

He has failed in his promise to keep America strong. Under Bush, U.S. foreign policy and international esteem have reached historic lows. After spending hundreds of billions of dollars since 9/11, the Bush administration has failed to catch Osama bin Laden, failed to find Saddam Hussein, failed to defeat Al Qaeda, and failed to stabilize Iraq after an invasion that his own Pentagon policy adviser, Richard Perle, now admits was “illegal.” As a result, the geopolitical balance of power has been jolted, traditional allies have been severely alienated, and as a result, the European Union – led by Great Britain – is now conducting secret talks about the formation of an EU military force outside NATO.

He has failed in his promise to be a “compassionate conservative.” Perhaps never before has a U.S. President so divided the country, according to a recent Time cover story. Despite Bush’s promise to be “a uniter, not a divider,” he has turned Republican against Democrat, rich against poor, Christian against Muslim. He has eroded our civil liberties and Constitutional rights in the name of “national security” and aided and abetted a corporate elite class in the theft of the Republican Party and the two-century-old values that made it the Party of Lincoln. “Corporations have been enthroned,” Lincoln said presciently before he died. “…An era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people…until wealth is aggregated in a few hands…and the Republic is destroyed.” Under Bush, Lincoln’s ominous – and accurate – prediction might find its final manifestation unless he and the “neo-con” corporate juggernaut are stopped.

DO YOU AGREE? Please let me know your thoughts. There will be more to come from me, including a detailed platform and agenda for ending the corporate reign in this country, shrinking the federal bureaucracy, and restoring Constitutional freedoms to pre-9/11 levels. Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to your comments and questions.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Another "BABOON" is born......not unlike Pat "BABOON" Bucanan.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Another "BABOON" is born......not unlike Pat "BABOON" Bucanan.

[Carry_Okie]

Anything is possible.

And if elected I will not run... ;-)

[dcwusmc]

Why? Does the record of each of them not speak volumes to you? Perhaps, just MAYBE, Dubya has done ok with the WOT, but I won't even give you that until he starts enforcing the WHOLE Bill of Rights and gets out of my way as far as providing for my own safety, as well as that of my family. He has NOT made us any "safer" with USA-PATRIOT or the TSA or any of that BravoSierra. And his spending would do credit to the whole Sixth Fleet with weekend liberty and a trainload of booze (for the uninitiated, he is spending money like a drunken sailor... MY money.) Daddy gave us "Read my lips" and then turned around and slapped gun-owners in the face with his import ban. So I have damn little respect for either member of the bush dynasty. In neither case, did their ventures into the Mid East accomplish their STATED purpose. Whether they accomplished any other purpose I leave to history to decide. I may have to hold my nose and vote for dubya... though that isn't a given... but I do NOT have to like or respect either elder or junior bush.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

The key word there was "might". Aishka "might" be able to slow him down a bit.

Besides Fairbanks doesn't mean any real lasting harm. He's just... playful.

[bazbo]

I already tried the Ross Perot gig and see what it got me? Although I agree with some of what you say but, until people start to feel the pain in the wallet the majority will just vote for the perceived winner. Until that time GW is my candidate.

[hellinahandcart]

Daddy was old enough to be a Naval Aviator in the Big One

Yes, as the youngest pilot ever.

He was seventeen when the war started, and about nine when Hitler became Chancellor.

Lots to hide, all right. (eye roll)

[dcwusmc]

And did you read the rest of my reply? Where I said that it was a throwaway line because I do NOT know where RC was going with his articles nor do I care to learn? Perhaps he has something to 'fess up to from his days at CIA, for all I know. But I despise him for his actions while in the White House and how he directly led to that despicable lowlife who followed him.

[nicmarlo]

I may not, and do not, agree with the current President's stance on every issue...some his fault, others not. However, I do admire this President. He is an excellent leader, a man of character, a President wanting the best for this country.

But he is not a king who places his pen to whatever is his desire and makes such whim or desire a law. Nor was his father. There are senators, on the other side of the aisle, who too often will not allow better plans to go forward...for no other reason than for selfish ambition. And that is well beyond President Bush's control.

[stands2reason]

With your tagline I don't trust you with HTB.

[stands2reason]

Yeah, he did mention it (Bush/Nazi article).


For your edification:


Seems you are hung up with the Nazi angle...........

Which Joe Conason (of all people!) convincingly dispproved.

143 posted on 11/29/2003 9:24 PM CST by eddie willers (Molly Ivins...the love child of Noam Chomsky and Minnie Pearl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

---

To: eddie willers

You are incorrect, sir, and I am in personal possession, as is the New Hampshire Gazette, of 300 pages of US government documents that prove my reporting and, in fact, discredit Mr. Conason. The culprit was AP, which badly misreported the story and sent it around the world without apology. I am still at war with them over the facts and their underlying truth, and I will not rest until the facts have been publicly established. Therefore, I trust you will be open-minded in the days ahead.

187 posted on 11/29/2003 9:52 PM CST by Republican Challenger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

[Chad Fairbanks]

Heh heh heh

[Chad Fairbanks]

Thanks...

[nicmarlo]

Yes, that's right, I remember that "hung up" comment. But when Chad posted info. more specific on the Nazi/Bush "connection," there seemed to be quite a length of time where he stopped posting...and I don't believe he ever responded to Chad's post.....I thought that "interesting."

[nicmarlo]

good night all; it's early morning here in NY.

[stands2reason]

can I send convertible pictures of myself to scarved women?

How 'bout I send you the picture of a woman killed by a scarf in a convertible?

[hellinahandcart]

And did you read the rest of my reply? Where I said that it was a throwaway line because I do NOT know where RC was going with his articles nor do I care to learn?

I read the rest of your reply. It doesn't make your original remark any less bewildering:

I really don't think Junior had anything to do with the Nazi stuff, but maybe Daddy has some things to 'fess up to...

And when I said that "Daddy" would have nothing to confess about "the Nazi stuff" you because he was too young at that time, you didn't say "Maybe he has things to fess up from his days at the CIA for all I know", you said this:

Daddy was old enough to be a Naval Aviator in the Big One

In other words, old enough to be in on the "Nazi stuff" with Prescott. (Just not old enough to drink. :P)

I didn't like him as President either, but geez. If you really don't know anything about that story, you shouldn't have said that George HW might have things to tell about it. You didn't come off looking very good there.

Oh well. Anyway, it was very gracious of you to exonerate Junior immediately. I guess you realized immediately where he fit in on the Nazi timeline.

[jospehm20]

A legend to many moveon.org members and eco terrorists everywhere.

[kanawa]

Big, nasty corporations hire middle class people.

And.....Doesn't middle class America invest through the stock market in these corporations and thereby attain a degree of ownership?

[Swordmaker]

Your article claiming a NAZI association for the Bush family has already been deconstructed on FreeRepublic and was found to be twaddle.

Prescott Bush was a member of the Board of Directors of a Bank that had financial links to a bank that was owned by the family of a former Nazi who was IMPRISONED by Hitler for breaking away from him and his policies. That is really a tenuous link through to many trivial connections to make ANY KIND of determination of Prescott Bush's political or philosophical leanings. In addition, Prescott Bush is dead. George W. Bush is TWO generations removed from him. In case you have not noticed, George W. Bush is NOT Prescott Bush.

Your article was a patchwork of incomplete research, stretched connections, and innuendo. That does not make it something to brag about; it makes it something to be ashamed of. Merely because other unethical journalists with agendas elected to reprint or quote your twaddle does not grant it any more weight... it just diminishes their credibility.

After visiting your website (very nicesly laid out by the way) I found that unfortunately, the thinking prowess you exhibited in that article is also apparent in your platform... superficial understanding, mis-information, and mis-application of facts. None of this would make me inclined to believe a word of your conclusions, your platform, or your chances of actually performing well in the office of the Presidency.

Thank God you have no chance of achieving that lofty goal!