|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted on 03/19/2003 7:57:38 AM PST by Chancellor Palpatine
"I respect and admire the French, who have been a far greater nation than we shall ever be, that is, if greatness means anything loftier than money and bombs."
— THOMAS FLEMING, "HARD RIGHT," MARCH 13, 2003
rom the very beginning of the War on Terror, there has been dissent, and as the war has proceeded to Iraq, the dissent has grown more radical and more vociferous. Perhaps that was to be expected. But here is what never could have been: Some of the leading figures in this antiwar movement call themselves "conservatives."
These conservatives are relatively few in number, but their ambitions are large. They aspire to reinvent conservative ideology: to junk the 50-year-old conservative commitment to defend American interests and values throughout the world — the commitment that inspired the founding of this magazine — in favor of a fearful policy of ignoring threats and appeasing enemies.
And they are exerting influence. When Richard Perle appeared on Meet the Press on February 23 of this year, Tim Russert asked him, "Can you assure American viewers . . . that we're in this situation against Saddam Hussein and his removal for American security interests? And what would be the link in terms of Israel?" Perle rebutted the allegation. But what a grand victory for the antiwar conservatives that Russert felt he had to air it.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
I wonder, though, who defines what constitutes "racialist rhetoric," and who has made the political/moral climate such that certain issues are "as welcome as [skunks] at a picnic?"
It seems to me that these calls to "purge" paleoconservatives just do the work of the liberals for them. The "anti-paleos" (dare I call them "neocons?") seem to take the validity of liberal definitions of "racialism" for granted, or at least they're too fearful to challenge those liberal definitions head-on. I sense liberal influence; they slipped behind conservative lines and told the neos and paleos, "Lets you and him fight!"
Your observation here may prove the paleos right when they say that conservatism has been "highjacked from the top-down" (from inside the Beltway, etc.)--there's a disconnect between the "national-level" officialdom RNC-style conservatives and the more "populist" grassroots. Over at NRO's "The Corner," Jonah Goldberg made a snide remark about South Carolina which he later backpedaled from when called on it, for example.
We also have more useless graphics from you on a thread that describes your agenda, amnesty boy.
Well, there are some Republicans who like having open borders as a way of guaranteeing cheap labor, even when "Middle America" feels harmed by the situation.
Some? LOL!
The American people have been screaming for relief from this epic invasion of criminals for years.......As the Democrats AND Republicans stand in stone cold silence..
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'll stipulate that I like graphics, but I have a sincere interest in being amused, if you think you can coherently summarize my "agenda," Lasorda boy.
Who?
There's an interesting critique of Frum's article at Rockwell's site. It starts with the basic fact that those Frum lumps together as paleocons represent very different points of view from libertarians and anarchocapitalists to nationalists, traditionalists and religious conservatives. Right-wing critics of President Bush's policies certainly don't all agree on immigration, race or foreign trade, though it's in Frum's interest to pretend that a few well placed shots will take out the whole pack. The author goes on to show how Frum reshapes actual circumstances to fit his argument.
Yet another reason that I've got no use for Lew Rockwell and his rantings.
There are two ways of using a person's words against him in a deceitful way.
1) by how one defines racism and
2) removing the context of a statement.
A perfect example is the wide spread quote of how Bucahnan praised Hitler in a column which is used as proof of his anti-semitism. Don't have the quote saved but I remember his original column and I clearly remember how it has been used. He mentioned how in W.W.I Hitler was a brave soldier and won several medals for bravery, being highly decorated as an EM was an exception in the imperial army of that day and quite an achievement. Besides being historically true the column from which it was lifted used Hitler as an example of how men with dangerous ideas should be taken seriously, deadly seriously and not made to look ridiculous and cartoonish. We mock or ignore these types at our own peril. That is hardly the praise and admiration it is portrayed to be by Buchanan's detractors.
- While I am an individualist and do not identify with any group nor understand the psychology of the need to I do not belittle those that feel that need through either national, regional or tribal pride. We seem to have a double standard these days where certain groups are fully allowed to publicly wave their pride and others are condemned for the same. Like whites in general, those who feel western civ is superior to stone age hunter/gatherers and especially despised is white Southerners. If someone is from a despised group, proud of it and defiant about it to the PC codes of the day so what? I haven't seen any of the listed malefactors call for another final solution or purification of the land or blood of the race nor have they called for the return of Jim Crow so where is the evil in their pride? Where is the evil in pointing out double standards? But this is being used as a negative for political reasons by those like Frum here, trying to say paleocons are all racists cranks. The reason is to specifically discredit all their ideas which will then nullify their position on foreign policy which is what this fight is really all about.
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.
Gene Callahan [
