Posted on 05/20/2015 9:42:50 PM PDT by WilliamIII
As Middle America rises in rage against “fast track” and the mammoth Obamatrade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, The Wall Street Journal has located the source of the malady. Last Monday's lead editorial began: “Here we go again. In the 1990s Pat Buchanan launched a civil war within the Republican Party on a platform targeting immigration and trade. Some claimed Pitchfork Pat was the future of the GOP, though in the end he mainly contributed to its presidential defeats.” But, woe is us, “the GOP's Buchanan wing is making a comeback.” Now it is true that, while Nixon and Reagan won 49-state landslides and gave the GOP five victories in six presidential contests, the party has fallen upon hard times. Only once since 1988 has a Republican presidential nominee won the popular vote. But was this caused by following this writer's counsel? Or by the GOP listening to the deceptions of its Davos-Doha-Journal wing? In the 1990s, this writer and allies in both parties fought NAFTA, GATT and MFN for China. The Journal and GOP establishment ran with Bill and Hillary and globalization. And the fruits of their victory? Between 2000 and 2010, 55,000 U.S. factories closed and 5 million to 6 million manufacturing jobs disappeared.
(Excerpt) Read more at stwnewspress.com ...
“You definitely have Buchanan confused with someone else.”
I most certainly do not have him confused with anyone else. His number one proposal in his presidential campaign was to raise taxes. He also is very big on intrusive government. Basically he is a Dim, but he has long fooled some people who think they are conservative.
Yep, the isolationist wing of the GOP was wrong then, but of course many even here seem to be incapable of thinking for themselves and just parrot the MSMediot line that the war in Iraq was bad.
Heck the fact that you parrot lines like “cakewalk” war without apparently recognizing the minimal casualties that the US had in Iraq seems to indicate you take your views from the mainstream received view too.
Buchanan’s platforms: wikipedia –
1992:
He ran on a platform of immigration reduction and social conservatism, including opposition to multiculturalism, abortion, and gay rights
1996:
Buchanan sought the Republican nomination from Dole’s right, voicing his opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
2000:
Buchanan proposed US withdrawal from the United Nations and expelling the UN from New York, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Housing and Urban Development, taxes on inheritance and capital gains, and affirmative action programs.
Sadly your wiki quotations miss one of his key points. I just did a search and found Buchanan still advocating for higher taxes today. I don’t know how you keep missing this?
The people of the GOP that’s whose
Pat Buchanan: It’s ‘Suicidal’ For Republicans To Raise Taxes
That was the third google entry when I entered - Pat Buchanan on taxes. I have always loved Pat Buchanan. I have seen him twice in person. I have seen him countless times on TV dating back to his nightly debates. I have NEVER heard him call for higher taxes. On the contrary, I have heard him complain of the tax burden on Americans and corporations. Could you please tell me where you found he advocates for higher taxes? Even the Wikipedia entry did not say that, and it is, of course, since he is conservative, a semi-hit piece.
You're implying the Republicans are conservative, all about low taxes, smaller government and secured borders?
Now you're suggesting Buchanan was just a big gov hack?
So you support Free Trade policies, NAFT, GATT, WTO and shipping tens of hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs to Chinese peasants?
And since you're a big GOP supporter, do you support lawless open borders which are all aided and abetted by the GOP?
And if you don't mind, could I see the specific link to that?
Yes I am in favor of freedom. As for borders, I favor a pro US regulated border.
As for you other post, here is a link:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Pat_Buchanan_Free_Trade.htm
where Buchanan in 2000 was quoted as extolling the “virtues” of higher taxes.
What is that bull sh*t? I don’t see anything there. Can you at least quote a sentence out of all that?
And where is the date to your evidence here?
So you support Free Trade policies, NAFT, GATT, WTO and shipping tens of hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs to Chinese peasants?
And since you're a big GOP supporter, do you support lawless open borders which are all aided and abetted by the GOP?
How many times are you going to evade these questions?
You're implying the Republicans are conservative, all about low taxes, smaller government and secured borders?
Now you're suggesting Buchanan was just a big gov hack?
Ya see these "?" at the ends of the sentences?
It means a question to you.
Why are you evadinig these questions?
Beijing does not deserve the same preferential treatment as Britain. The US should negotiate a reciprocal treaty with China that imposes on its goods at least the same tariffs and taxes Beijing imposes on ours, and we should veto any additional World Bank and Asian Development Bank loans to China. These are nothing but foreign aid.
___________________________________________________
This is your link to show Buchanan was a big gov big tax guy?
You’re joking right?
Show me the paragraph and the link.
You can cut and paste right?
Do it JLS.
And that is the actual headline on the piece.
Which means they lose me before paragraph one.
Illiterates.
You do know that a tariff is a tax, right? Buchanan has for year extolled the virtues of higher taxes.
A tariff is an easily avoidable tax.
Show me the paragraph and the link.
You can cut and paste right?
Do it JLS.
Why are you evading the questions JLS?
Shall I post them all for you again?
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.