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 ...
And look where the GOP is today. Look where the U.S. is today. Total decline.
I think most favored nation status for China is when free trade agreements stopped being authentic.
The TPP is cronyist garbage for big business, and allows backdoor de facto amnesty for aliens who come to America.
“Whose” to blame? Really? “Whose”?
For the grammar-deficient, try “Who’s” as in “Who is”.
ARGH!
How could a high tax, big government type like Buchanan, whether he claimed to be a Republican or admitted he was Democrat like he is, cause a civil war in the GOP.
The most obvious change since 1988 and now is that in 1988 the Democrat brand was at a low. GHW Bush ran on the simple platform of calling his opponent a liberal. Liberal was such a dirty word that leftist gave up that word they had appropriated from advocates of freedom and went back to a prior discredited brand of theirs, progressivism.
Since then the situation has switched. By working through the culture the GOP or Republican brand has been discredited at least with style voters. Democrats are seen as hip while Republicans as old and out of it. But that probably peaked in 2008. Obama was still avant-garde enough to win reelection in 2012.
The Dims betting this will work again in 2016. The problem is their likely candidate doesn’t have much if any style. So will those low attachment voters who put Obama over the top twice, bother to come out and vote this year. Remember even the youtube sensation “Obama Girl” in 2008 did not get around to actually voting for him. These voters are hard to motivate unless you can sell them on the it is cool factor to vote for you. Are they really going to think it is cool to vote for the current Dim front runner?
The TPP is a horror show for America.....and our own folks are helping Barry, Hillary and the rest of the globalist pals to get it pushed thru.
You're implying the Republicans are conservative, all about low taxes, smaller government and secured borders?
BTW, Buchanan bailing out of the Republican Party was a good thing. Millions followed Pat since. He was right then, and right now. Some figured out years later they'd been had by the GOP. Some never did and a few others are still trying to perpetuate the hoax.
Buchanan said, "The differences between the Beltway parties were inconsequential."
He became hated by the party rank and file for daring to say the truth.
Whose going to loose?
Gotta love WSJ, doncha? GWHB and Dole both lost big to Clinton, but you’d think somehow Buchanan was the guy that lost.
From the article:
On immigration, this writer did campaign on securing the border in 1991-92, when there were 3 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
But the Bush Republicans refused to seal the border.
On immigration, this writer did campaign on securing the border in 1991-92, when there were 3 million illegal immigrants in the United States.
But the Bush Republicans refused to seal the border.
We did urge a “moratorium” on legal immigration, such as America had from 1924 to 1965, to assimilate and Americanize the millions who had come. The Journal Republicans called that xenophobia.
Since then, tens of millions of immigrants, here legally and illegally, mostly from the Third World, have arrived. Economically, they consume more in tax dollars than they contribute.
Politically, most belong to ethnic groups that vote between 70 and 90 percent Democratic.
Their children will bury the GOP.
Lest we forget, the “Buchanan wing” also opposed the invasion of Iraq while the Journal-War Party wing howled, “Onto Baghdad!”
“Unpatriotic Conservatives,” we were called in a cover story by a neocon National Review for saying the war was unnecessary and unwise.
Now, a dozen years after the “cakewalk” war, GOP candidates like Marco Rubio and Bush III are trying to figure out what it was all about, Alfie, and what they would have done, had they only known.
Our agenda in that decade was – stay out of wars that are not our business, economic patriotism, secure borders, and America first.
The foreign debt and de-industrialization of America, the trillion-dollar wars and the chaos of the Middle East, the shortened life span of the Party of Reagan, that’s your doing, fellas, not ours.
I cringed, too.
LOL
The three Ws of journalism.
Whose.
Whats.
Wheres.
I think people confusing MFN with a FTA is a large problem.
PAT WAS RIGHT!!!! I always supported him back then on trade and immigration.
I don't see much evidence of this supposed rage.
(W)ho’s(e) really to blame...
And often - Hows is seen.
Amen
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.