PDA

View Full Version : Pat Buchanan: the great betrayal


in hiding
02-05-2008, 11:45 PM
The Great Betrayal

by Patrick J. Buchanan
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_02_11/buchanan.html
Offering more “straight talk” on the Sunday before the Florida primary, John McCain made an arresting prediction: “It’s a tough war we’re in. It’s not going to be over right away. There’s going to be other wars. I’m sorry to tell you, there’s going to be other wars. We will never surrender but there will be other wars.”

Ike promised to “go to Korea” and ended that war. Nixon pledged to end Vietnam with honor. McCain says we may be in Iraq a hundred years and warns, “there’s going to be other wars.” Take the man at his word.

Mimicking the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann,” McCain has joked about “Bomb, bomb, bomb—bomb, bomb Iran” and urged the expulsion of Russia from the G-8. He wants to expand NATO to bring in Georgia and the Ukraine. This could mean confrontation between Russia and the United States over whether South Ossetia and Abkhazia should be free of Georgia or ruled by Tbilisi, a matter of zero vital interest to this country.

We are forewarned. John McCain intends to be a war president.

Where Bush has lately cleansed his administration of neocons, McCain offers the last best hope for a neocon return and restoration and more wars in the Middle East. And if, as seems probable, Bibi Netanyahu again becomes prime minister of Israel, he and a President McCain will find a pretext for war on Iran.

Year 2008 may prove a defining one for conservatives. For on many of the great issues, McCain has sided as often with the Left and the Big Media as he has with the Right.

Where Bush has been at his best, cutting taxes and nominating conservative judges, McCain has been his nemesis. Not only did he vote twice against the Bush tax cuts, McCain colluded to sell out the most conservative of Bush’s judges

In 1993, McCain voted to confirm the pro-abortion liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg. But when Bush set out to restore constitutionalism, McCain formed the Gang of 14, seven senators from each party. All agreed to vote to block the GOP Senate from invoking the “nuclear option”—i.e., empowering the GOP to break a filibuster of judicial nominees by majority vote—unless the seven Democrats agreed.

With this record of voting for Clinton justices and joining with Democrats anxious to kill the most conservative Bush’s nominees, what guarantee is there a President McCain would nominate and fight for the fifth jurist who would vote to overturn Roe v Wade?

McCain also colluded with liberals to pass McCain-Feingold, a law that denies to Second Amendment folks and right-to-lifers their First Amendment right to identify friends and foes in TV ads before national elections.

On ANWAR, too, McCain votes with the liberals, and on global warming he has moved toward Gore.

After five record trade deficits have denuded the nation of thousands of factories and 3 million manufacturing jobs, McCain is still babbling on about Smoot-Hawley. “When you study history,” he told a Detroit newspaper, “every time we’ve adopted protectionism, we’ve paid a very heavy price.”

But what history was McCain talking about? From Lincoln through Calvin Coolidge, the GOP was the Party of Protection that put 12 presidents in the White House to two for the Democrats, and the U.S. became the most awesome industrial power and self-reliant nation in the history of mankind, producing 42 percent of the world’s manufactured goods. Even Hillary, whose husband passed NAFTA with McCain’s support, has begun to question the free-trade paradigm and the disastrous results it has produced.

On controlling America’s borders and halting the invasion through Mexico, McCain collaborated with Senate liberals in the McCain-Kennedy amnesty, which was rejected only after a national uprising.

When 190,000 Arizonans petitioned in 2004 to put Prop 200 on the ballot, requiring proof of citizenship before an individual could vote or receive welfare benefits, John McCain led the GOP congressional delegation in opposing it unanimously. Prop 200 passed with the support of 56 percent of all Arizona voters and 46 percent of Hispanics.

Unsurprisingly, Juan Hernandez, the open-borders chatterbox and former adviser to Vicente Fox, has turned up in McCain’s campaign.

On the two issues where Bush has been at his best, taxes and judges, McCain has sided against him. On the three issues that have ravaged the Bush presidency—the misbegotten war in Iraq, the failure to secure America’s borders, and the trade policy that has destroyed the dollar, de-industrialized the country, and left foreigners with $5 trillion to buy up America—McCain has sided with Bush.

Now McCain is running on a platform that says your jobs are not coming back, the illegals are not going home, but we are going to have more wars. If you don’t like it, vote for Hillary.

And this was to be the Year of Change.

Jake
02-06-2008, 01:17 AM
McCain isn't a man of war...he's a realist. War happens

in hiding
02-06-2008, 07:20 AM
McCain isn't a man of war...he's a realist. War happens

no one has ever said wars / conflicts don't happen. There are times when you don't have to get involved and you don't have to go looking for conflict. But the article was about more than just the war.

middletree
02-06-2008, 08:54 AM
no one has ever said wars / conflicts don't happen. There are times when you don't have to get involved and you don't have to go looking for conflict. But the article was about more than just the war.

Yep. The point of the article was about so much more.

sandyandporter
02-06-2008, 10:06 AM
Yep. The point of the article was about so much more.

Care to expound?

middletree
02-06-2008, 10:58 AM
Care to expound?

Did you read it?
I don't say that in a confrontational way, BTW.

The article is saying that everything that the author perceives that Bush has done right has been opposed by McCain, and everything that the author perceives that Bush as done wrong has been supported by McCain. And he's right.

McCain is a RINO, and there's nothing wrong with that. He can and should vote his conscience. I kind of like that independent spirit about him. Refusing to conform to party lines for the sake of conformity is something that I wish all politicians would engage in. But as is turns out, I disagree with McCain's positions on almost everything, so I'm not sure how I will vote come November. I definitely plan, at this time, to vote for Ron Paul in March. If he's dropped out, I'll go with Huck Mikeabee.

Valpo
02-06-2008, 11:14 AM
There is a difference between the conservative party and the republican party. McCain is not a RINO, he has been "conservative" on his votes in congress 85% of the time, that is hardly someone who is a (blank) In Name Only. Plus McCain is just being a realist saying there will be other wars. He said troops should have some sort of presence in Iraq for 100 years if we have to to make sure the place is secure. He was clearly over stating how long to stress a point. Plus, has anyone noticed we still have military presence in South Korea and Japan, among other WWII or 50's places? The so called "Conservatives" have done a great job of painting McCain as some sort of liberal, but the fact is that just isn't true. If one were to look at his overall record, they were see he is plenty conservative.

in hiding
02-06-2008, 11:15 AM
McCain is a RINO, and there's nothing wrong with that. He can and should vote his conscience. I kind of like that independent spirit about him. Refusing to conform to party lines for the sake of conformity is something that I wish all politicians would engage in.

I too like someone who doesn't toe the party line for the sake of toeing the party line; I also take issue with him on some actions and stances he takes.

middletree
02-06-2008, 11:19 AM
he has been "conservative" on his votes in congress 85% of the time
Perhaps a better way of putting it is that he votes opposite of my viewpoints on the few issues that are most important to me.

Valpo
02-06-2008, 11:52 AM
Perhaps a better way of putting it is that he votes opposite of my viewpoints on the few issues that are most important to me.

that is fair enough

WeaselInYerFoot
02-06-2008, 11:52 AM
The McCain quotes from the beginning of the article can be seen here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP-mk7Vri_g). It was taken out of context and sounds pretty scary when you leave out the fact that he was answering a question about veterans health care and how there will always be wars and wounded soldiers to treat.

But the article still makes a good point. If people are looking for a republican, they're not gonna find one in McCain. That's not necessarily bad, but it is the truth.

in hiding
02-06-2008, 12:17 PM
The McCain quotes from the beginning of the article can be seen here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP-mk7Vri_g). It was taken out of context and sounds pretty scary when you leave out the fact that he was answering a question about veterans health care and how there will always be wars and wounded soldiers to treat.

But the article still makes a good point. If people are looking for a republican, they're not gonna find one in McCain. That's not necessarily bad, but it is the truth.

thank you for clarifying the context of the quote.

VerbumReale
02-06-2008, 12:20 PM
Plus, has anyone noticed we still have military presence in South Korea and Japan, among other WWII or 50's places? The so called "Conservatives" have done a great job of painting McCain as some sort of liberal, but the fact is that just isn't true. If one were to look at his overall record, they were see he is plenty conservative.

Plus some of our largest military bases are in Germany.

sandyandporter
02-06-2008, 12:26 PM
Did you read it?
I don't say that in a confrontational way, BTW.

The article is saying that everything that the author perceives that Bush has done right has been opposed by McCain, and everything that the author perceives that Bush as done wrong has been supported by McCain. And he's right.

McCain is a RINO, and there's nothing wrong with that. He can and should vote his conscience. I kind of like that independent spirit about him. Refusing to conform to party lines for the sake of conformity is something that I wish all politicians would engage in. But as is turns out, I disagree with McCain's positions on almost everything, so I'm not sure how I will vote come November. I definitely plan, at this time, to vote for Ron Paul in March. If he's dropped out, I'll go with Huck Mikeabee.

No offense taken. ;)

I did read it but I couldn't tell from your post if you were being sarcastic, tongue in cheek or what.

I'm seldom swayed by individual votes. Reason being... you don't know what else was attached to it that may make a person say "no way am I giving this my vote when it means you're also getting $ for _______". It's a shame that this practice was allowed to start and is allowed to continue.

I too like his independent spirit and feel like at least with him you always know where he stands and what he's thinking. In other words... he's real.

I find it hard to believe that a former POW is a warmonger. Just doesn't ring true to me.

I would pick McCain over Romney. Past that I'm not sure.....

Valpo
02-06-2008, 12:28 PM
The McCain quotes from the beginning of the article can be seen here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP-mk7Vri_g). It was taken out of context and sounds pretty scary when you leave out the fact that he was answering a question about veterans health care and how there will always be wars and wounded soldiers to treat.

But the article still makes a good point. If people are looking for a republican, they're not gonna find one in McCain. That's not necessarily bad, but it is the truth.

Thanks for the clarification but again I state:

If people are looking for a full fledged conservative, they're not going to find one in McCain. But they won't find one in Huck or Mitt either. If people are looking for a Republican ( historically more moderate than conservative party) they can find a solid one in John McCain. Three or four issues over the span of a quarter century does not disqualify someone's party identity.

sandyandporter
02-06-2008, 12:56 PM
Thanks for the clarification but again I state:

If people are looking for a full fledged conservative, they're not going to find one in McCain. But they won't find one in Huck or Mitt either. If people are looking for a Republican ( historically more moderate than conservative party) they can find a solid one in John McCain. Three or four issues over the span of a quarter century does not disqualify someone's party identity.

Good point. Also.... it is high time we started looking at each and every candidate as an individual and not based on what party they are. Perhaps it's time to do away with Republicans and Democrats altogether and just have The Conservative Party, Moderate Party and Liberal Party.

I for one do not like being labeled as any party. My views are a mixed bag.

middletree
02-06-2008, 01:29 PM
just have The Conservative Party, Moderate Party and Liberal Party.


That wouldn't work for me, as I have some hard-core liberal values (anti-death penalty, pro-gun control) and hard-core conservative values (abortion, taxes)

Jesuslove
02-06-2008, 01:38 PM
That wouldn't work for me, as I have some hard-core liberal values (anti-death penalty, pro-gun control) and hard-core conservative values (abortion, taxes)

I feel the same way. I have some conservative values and some liberal values, and I share the specific ones you listed above.

sandyandporter
02-06-2008, 01:54 PM
That wouldn't work for me, as I have some hard-core liberal values (anti-death penalty, pro-gun control) and hard-core conservative values (abortion, taxes)

So what "label" do you use now? See I'm the same way..... two ends of the spectrum. Some of my friends refer to me as a tree hugger and yet I have some extreme conservative values as well.

My whole point is.... you can't pick a candidate by their party. You HAVE to look at each individual.

middletree
02-06-2008, 02:26 PM
So what "label" do you use now?

I don't.

I think you and I are like most people. We're not the exception. However, the candidates and the press can't sell that. They do much better with an "us against them" mentality, so they convince us that it's all about that. Kinda reminds me of "Hotel Rwanda", where each of two tribes was taught to despise the other, but no reason was given.

sandyandporter
02-06-2008, 02:46 PM
You and I are alike? :eek: *runs screaming into traffic*;) :P

middletree
02-06-2008, 03:18 PM
You and I are alike? :eek: *runs screaming into traffic*;) :P

Yep, and I have Ohio roots, too.

sandyandporter
02-06-2008, 03:47 PM
Yep, and I have Ohio roots, too.

Are you my brother???

Jason
02-06-2008, 04:56 PM
Are you my brother???

Yes he is and so am I.

*sings We are family. All my brothers and sisters and me*