The Neocons & Nixon's Southern Strategy ( Pat Buchanan slams Kristol )

washingtondispatch ^ | 12/29/2002 | Pat Buchanan

[LibertarianInExile]

How does this explain why Pat ran a third-party candidacy, do you think? Is it that he disagrees with that premise?

This is why Pat will never have a place in a Republican administration again: he's willing to say just about anything as long as it's self-promoting. The whole Nixon staff is a bunch of cutthroats, with the single exception of G. Gordon, who was the only good guy in the whole mess. I'm glad that bastard Nixon will be greeting all of the rest of them when they walk through the gates--you pick which gates they'll be walking through, but I'm pretty sure the gates will have the words "Abandon All Hope" up on top...

[LibertarianInExile]

Um, could you generalize a little more? When you say something like "most paleoconservatives are bigots," you are further adding to the 'Republicans are sexist-racist-homophobes" bandwagon, since people think all conservatives are Republicans.

Further, the first thing that many neocons do when they want to defend their ideas against logically valid attacks is to trot out the anti-Semite charge, and I'm sick of it. I'm libertarian, and many paleos hate that viewpoint, but I will be the first to say that bigotry is not endemic to paleos any more than idiocy or lefthandedness is epidemic among neocons. It's a difference of opinion regarding government. Please don't jump on paleos because they'd like to take government back to the 1800s. Just because slavery was around then doesn't mean they're all for it.

[LibertarianInExile]

Well, yeah, but y'all know how the right has their tokens serving in the Massa's house...just ask the neocons whose heads were nodding when that jackass calypso singer started flapping his gums.

[LibertarianInExile]

A McGovern presidency would have turned the U.S. over to the left entirely. I can't imagine anything more important than voting "not-him" then, when the differences were so stark, and were I in Nixon's shoes, I can't imagine not doing everything possible to beat him. Especially bearing in mind that Nixon deserved the 60 election--he was paranoid but his legitimate persecution may have made him rightfully so.

Not that I liked the guy. I think Nixon's dodging pitchforks. But that doesn't mean I disagreed with EVERYTHING about him, and not disbursing money to Congress to use for his own campaign is definitely one move I am 100% okay with, even with Sam Ervin as the result. Coulda been much worse.

[hosepipe]

[ the rich fat cat heartless ceo's of corporations ]

I want to agree with you but damn you sound like a democrat or a RINO yourself.. Sorry, too many code words.. You must be brain washed as well...

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a393437456811.htm The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International

[jeremiah]

I always forget to put in the sarcasm alert, sorry. When I reread, it doesn't sound like a joke, it reads like the NYTimes front page.

[Classicaliberalconservative]

See I did not generalize because I said MOST not ALL. If I said all that would be generalizing. And no I am not adding to the Republicans are sexist-racist-homphobes bandwagon since I did not say Republicans are bigots but paleocons are. Sam Francis, Peter Brimelow, Thomas Fleming, Chilton Williamson, Jared Taylor etc etc etc. Have you read any of their articles? The make Trent Lott's comment seem like the I have a Dream Speech. I am a conservative because of my belief in traditional values and classical economics, not because I think that our white European Christian civilization is threatened by the colored masses of the third world. I am against affirmative action, illegal immigration, and the left wing version of multiculturalism. I also happen to be for a reduction in legal immigration levels. But I do not racialize the issue and I happen to believe that immigrants can assimilate, all of them no matter where they come from. I know I did it rather well. And you know what? I am not the one who labels myself a neoconservative, at least not originally. I thought that I was just a plain conservative until these paleocons labeled ME and everyone conservative that thinks as I do a neocon. Paleoconservatives are mostly intolerant, of other viewpoints and of people who are different from them.

[Classicaliberalconservative]

Most of these are on the table but liberals are blocking their implementation. That does not change the fact that it is neoconservative scholars and think tanks that developed these ideas. Oh and the borken windows theory was implemented by hizzoner Rudy Guiliani and that worked very well. NEOCONS RULE!!!

[Ohioan]

You do some nasty labelling. But the bottom line seems to be that you are intolerant of people who want to preserve more traditional values than you do. What really is your point? Because you are 80% as Conservative as some of those whom you assail, is that a reason to assail them, rather than the "Leftists" with whom you agree only 20% of the time?

This need to throw bones, as it were, to the propagandists of the Left, who have spent three generations trying to condition Academia to what is now "politically correct," is tearing the Right apart in America. And when dysrons like Bill Kristol actually work with the New York Times--no moderate news media, it--the pattern becomes even clearer.

Let me, then, attack head on, what you seem to be saying. You would limit immigration and restraints on economic freedom, motivated by Leftwing social engineering, but you want to make it perfectly clear, that you do not like Conservatives who want to preserve their ancestral faiths, blood-lines--the ties of kith and kin--and the celebration of a common history and shared struggle. But why--other than the staccato cries of "xenophobia," "racism," "nativism," and "bigotry," which the Left uses because they have no valid argument--would you feel that way?

Since Biblical times, the greatest motivation for positive social behavior in the West, has been to pass on your values, heritage, material and spiritual achievements, etc., to your descendants. Nationality has always been about those things. It is ludicrous how many otherwise intelligent Conservatives and moderates, feel a compulsion to distance themselves from normal human motivations. It is also fatal to our cause.

If you are concerned about acts of cruelty directed against other peoples, I have no problem with that concern. I share it. But let's not put people down, who simply want to preserve the cultural and biological heritage that they were born into. That is not a rational basis to put anyone down!

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site

[Ohioan]

I forgot to wish everyone a Happy New Year!

Bill Flax

[Classicaliberalconservative]

You want to talk about "nasty labeling". What about people who say thaty every non-white immigrant is a threat to the American nation, or that the conservative movement was hijacked by "politically correct" liberals i.e people who think the government should have color blind policies on EVERYTHING, immigration, quotas, etc. I have no problems with people preserving ancestral faiths since I happen to be an evangelical Protestant. And guess what? I like celebrating our common histroy too. Common meaning all Americans. We are a nation of immigrants after all. And I believe in American values too: free markets, property rights, civil rights, opportunity and the influence that Christianity and Western Civilization has on our country. So why do I attack these people who agree with me 80% of the time? Well the 20% of the time they do not agree with me is on what it means to be an American as well as who can be considered one. I love and respect all people in this country and I do not think that our "biological heritage" is limited to one race or one group of people. So yes partially it is about acts of cruelty directed against other peoples (who are Americans also btw). But it is more than that. It is about acceptance of people like me who came after 1965 as Americans too; people who were not really allowed to come before then. So no I am not throwing bones to the left. I am focusing on people who seek to divide our nation, just like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Antonio Villagrosa, and Angela Oh. They and the Jared Taylors and Sam Francises(spelled right?) deserve each other while the rest of the country moves on. Furthermore I also believe in globalization, free trade and yes spreading our values abroad. We are right afterall, most of the time.

[Classicaliberalconservative]

"I forgot to wish everyone a Happy New Year!"

You too

[Ohioan]

Let me thank you for responding to my query as to why you focus on the 20% of the issues on which you disagree with the traditional Conservative position, rather than where you agree. You have been frank, and I would like to be frank in my response--answering you in a spirit of good will, but anything but agreement. I think that the continuing exchange might be very helpful to many "on the fence," as it were. However, there seems to be no one else, who is still interested in this thread.

I will check back, and if there are indications of any more general interest, I will respond here. If not, I am sure our paths will cross again, and we can pursue this further, later.

William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site