Wholy Batcrap - Pat Buchanan and I are actually, almost in agreeance!!

[LynneSin]

ALMOST - the end results we are 110% in agreeance but the reason why is a different story

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Buchanan_suggests_Bush_imp_0829.html

Buchanan suggests Bush impeachment
John Byrne


Pat Buchanan, a leading conservative pundit and former presidential adviser, quietly suggested House Republicans mull impeaching President Bush -- though not for the liberals' cause celebre, Iraq -- but rather for what he sees as Bush's 'criminal' failure to stem the tide of illegal immigrants, RAW STORY has discovered.


Ok, personally criminal activites is a good reason for impeachment but surely not for illegal immigration.

Still - even a broken clock is right twice a day

:crazy:

[Inland]

1. Agreeance embiggens the man. nt

[RPM]

7. what a cromulent statement

:toast:

[dutchdemocrat]

2. You spelt his name wrong

Which confirms his demographic.

[LynneSin]

4. Hey, I haven't had my morning green tea yet

cobwebs need clearing still

:crazy:

[mixedview]

3. yes, but who will Pat install, David Duke ?

Buchanan may seem like a funny old guy .. look below the surface and you will see he is a nativist.. iow a moderate white nationalist.

[H2O Man]

8. It's strange .....

I think that people who read Pat's books will find he is actually fairly progressive in some of the areas of trade and foreign policy. He is without question a bright fellow. But his thoughts on social policy are those of a scared human being, who in turn accepts scary ways to attempt to deal with people who are different than him. When one considers the harshness that the Irish were confronted with by nativists in the USA, and then considers Pat's grasp of history, it's strange that he can be such a fool on some issues. It reminds me of the old saying about choosing one's enemies carefully, because they are who you end up resembling the most.

[mixedview]

10. Yes. If you are familiar at all with the Racialist Right

you will see that Buchanan is the "mainstream" politician they support most.

I'm more of a libertarian so I don't agree with him almost anything, and certainly don't agree with any of his reasoning.

But, what liberals sometimes fail to understand, is that even though he may be be an economic protectionist - he (like Lou Dobbs) does so in the name of economic nationalism (stop the browns and yellows from stealing the white man's jobs) - which is consistent with his views on immigration.

All of his views actually make sense if you step back and see what he wants to do: create an isolated, white, Christian America "like it was meant to be". The was pretty much the ideology of the old, racist Southern Democrats (the Dixiecrats).

[rasputin1952]

5. Wooo...you and Pat are coming onto the same side of something???

This is indeed a :scared: thought....:)

[wakeme2008]

6. Read Pat from 2003 -- Whose War

http://www.amconmag.com/03_24_03/cover.html

arch 24, 2003 issue
Copyright © 2003 The American Conservative

Whose War?

A neoconservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America’s interest.

by Patrick J. Buchanan

The War Party may have gotten its war. But it has also gotten something it did not bargain for. Its membership lists and associations have been exposed and its motives challenged. In a rare moment in U.S. journalism, Tim Russert put this question directly to Richard Perle: “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?

..more at link...

While I do not agree with everything Pat has written about the Iraqi Invasion, he does hit on the neocons very well.

[RPM]

9. Reading Pat's "where the right went wrong"

interesting read

[Greeby]

12. Reading this article

Pat seems like the sanest one in the room. :crazy:

[The Traveler]

11. Actually, he has a point

As President, Bush's duty is to enforce the law, and he has made it clear that, in complicity with Mr Fox of Mexico, he has no intention of doing so. That constitutes dereliction of duty, an impeachable offense.