| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/25 |
| 2005/11/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:40531 Activity:insanely high |
11/10 Pat Buchanan, who was always against the invasion of Iraq, rubs it in
"Thus, in March, 2003, Bush, in perhaps the greatest strategic blunder
in U.S. history, invaded an Arab nation that had not attacked us, did
not want war with us, and did not threaten us--to strip it of weapons
we now know it did not have. Result: Shia and Kurds have been liberated
from Saddam, but Iran has a new ally in southern Iraq, Osama has a new
base camp in the Sunni Triangle, the Arab and Islamic world have been
radicalized against the United States, and copy-cat killers of Al Qaida
have been targeting our remaining allies in Europe and the Middle East:
Spain, Britain, Egypt and Jordan. And, lest we forget, 2055 Americans
are dead and Walter Reed is filling up."
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=10210
\_ Uhm, Pat was never on the Dubya bandwagon. Pat has always been an
isolationist. He is opposed to US membership in the UN and most
other forms of non-trade involvement with the rest of the world.
\_ uh, yerright about his being anti-neocon the whole time
http://www.amconmag.com/2004_11_08/cover.html
\_ Yeah, weird how some people on the motd actually know wtf
they're talking about and are beyond the black/white "h8t
u awl!!1" political 'philosophy' espoused by too many here.
Pat has been consistent in his isolationist views going back
to GWB's pre-politics days. Too many people around here find
some random tidbit and post it thinking they're making some
big point or there's some giant earth shaking change going on,
but who have essentially zero real knowledge of history.
It's mostly the silly "gotcha!" and "we're winning!" stuff
which is no better than dailykos or freepers.
\_ shrug, it was random enough to be first on http://drudgereport.com
\_ exactly. I read drudge for the "man bitten by >insert
name of dangerous animal<" links. He also posts some
oddball stuff you won't find else where which is fun.
The rest is pre-posts of NYT editorials, political
sniping, various forms of rabble rousing to keep his
hit rates up, and the inevitable cross links to other
sites in what looks like an ad/link swap deal, mostly
recently with breitbart(sp?) news. I don't read drudge
for in depth and meaningful political commentary.
I honestly was completely oblivious to the notion that
there was a real conservative group (other than the
Scowcroft, etc. old-hands assoc w/ Bush Sr.) that opposed
the invasion pre-invasion -op
\_ That's why they're called "neo" cons. There are still
plenty (I'd guess a majority) of conservatives who are
in favor of not invading other countries, lower taxes,
less spending, smaller government, and all the other
traditional conservative agenda items. Thus it makes
me laugh and sad at the same time to see the various
motd personalities posting as if the freepers are the
sole representatives of the conservative movement.
Laughter from how ignorant a belief that is and sadness
at how closely otherwise intelligent people hold such
a belief.
\_ Okay, I'll update the link to reflect that. |
| 5/25 |
|
| www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=10210 Bush Deserves Blame for Tuesday's GOP Defeats With the rout of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's initiatives, Democratic vic tories in New Jersey and Virginia, and President Bushs free fall in nat ional polls on job performance, credibility and character, the Republica n Party is in imminent peril of losing the country. Indeed, since 9/11, the party has indulged in a willful self-delusion tha t it has become Americas Party. The Bush triumph in 2004, talking heads brayed, settled the matter: Red State America has triumphed over Blue S tate America. Where Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan rolled u p 49-state landslides in re-election runs, Bush won 31 states, losing ev ery state north of the Potomac and east of Ohio, two of the three great industrial states of the Midwest, Michigan and Illinois, and he was skun ked on the Pacific rim. Had Kerry hammered him on trade and lost jobs in Ohio, Bush would be a one-term president. What killed the first Bush presidency and is ruining the second is the ab andonment of Reaganism and his embrace of the twin heresies of neoconser vatism and Big Government Conservatism, as preached by the resident ideo logues at The Weekly Standard and Wall Street Journal. Under Bush I, taxes were raised, funding for HUD and Education exploded, and a quota bill was signed under which small businesses, accused of rac ial discrimination, were made to prove their innocence, or be punished, in true Soviet fashion. Under Bush II, social spending has exploded to levels LBJ might envy, for eign aid has been doubled, pork-at-every-meal has become the GOP diet of choice, surpluses have vanished, and the deficit is soaring back toward 5% of GDP. Both Bushes abandoned the economic patriotism that had put America and Am ericans firstfor free-trade globalism. Result: the most massive trade d eficits in US history, the gutting of our industrial base, the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs, and the largest wealth transfer of all time with technology, factories, high-tech and high-skilled jobs pouring out of America into Asia. Working America and the middle class have been sacrificed on the high alt ar of the Republican Moloch of Free Trade. And how have our Chinese brot hers reciprocated our magnanimity? Both Bushes embraced the open borders immigration policy the Wall Stree t Journal has trumpeted for two decades. Result: We have 10-15 million i llegal aliens in our country, among whom gangs like the murderous Mara S alvatrucha are proliferating. Native-born California taxpayers are fleei ng the Golden State, as Third World tax consumers pour in. So great is t he crisis on the Mexican border even the liberal Democratic governors of New Mexico and Arizona have declared states of emergency. Meanwhile 35, 000 US troops stand guardon the border of South Korea. The late editorial editor of the Journal, Robert Bartley, once said, I b elieve the nation-state is finished. He and his progeny have surely don e their level best to bring that about. As the country we grew up in becomes unrecognizable, we still hear the Jo urnal, that good and faithful servant of the US Business Roundtable, w arning us not to oppose open borders. Panglo ss, Ben Wattenberg, warbles on about our being the first universal nati on and, in echo of M Dominic de Villepin, burbles, Isnt diversity wo nderful! In foreign policy, Bush I was an internationalist out to build a New Wor ld Order after the Cold War. However, post-9/11, Bush II converted to a neoconservatism that calls for unilateral American intervention in the Middle East and the Islamic world, to bring down dictators and establish democracy. Thus, in March, 2003, Bush, in perhaps the greatest strategic blunder in US history, invaded an Arab nation that had not attacked us, did not w ant war with us, and did not threaten usto strip it of weapons we now k now it did not have. Result: Shia and Kurds have been liberated from Saddam, but Iran has a ne w ally in southern Iraq, Osama has a new base camp in the Sunni Triangle , the Arab and Islamic world have been radicalized against the United St ates, and copy-cat killers of Al Qaida have been targeting our remaining allies in Europe and the Middle East: Spain, Britain, Egypt and Jordan. And, lest we forget, 2055 Americans are dead and Walter Reed is filling up. True to the neoconservative creed, Bush launched a global crusade for dem ocracy that is now bringing ever closer to power Hamas in Gaza and the W est Bank, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Syri a, and Shia fundamentalists in Baghdad and Basra. To Arab and Islamic peoples, whether the Crusaders come in the name of God or in the name of democra cy, they are still Crusaders. When Ronald Reagan went home to California, his heirs said, Goodbye to a ll that, and embraced Big Government conservatism, then neoconservatism . If they do not find their way home soon, to the principles of Taft, Go ldwater and Reagan, they will perish in the wildness into which they hav e led us all. For a no-risk, trial subscription to HUMAN EVENTS, please click here. Free Email Alerts: Register now to receive insider reports, news updates and special offers. Submit For Subscribers Only = these articles may be viewed by subscribers only. |
| www.amconmag.com/2004_11_08/cover.html November 8, 2004 issue Unfortunately, this election does not offer traditional conservatives an easy or natural choice and has left our editors as split as our readersh ip. In an effort to deepen our readers and our own understanding of the options before us, weve asked several of our editors and contributors to make the conservative case for their favored candidate. Their piece s, plus Takis column closing out this issue, constitute TACs endorseme nt. The Real Deal Coming Home By Patrick J Buchanan In the fall of 2002, the editors of this magazine moved up its launch dat e to make the conservative case against invading Iraq. Such a war, we wa rned, on a country that did not attack us, did not threaten us, did not want war with us, and had no role in 9/11, would be a tragedy and a dis aster. Invade and we inherit our own West Bank of 23 million Iraqis, un ite Islam against us, and incite imams from Morocco to Malaysia to preac h jihad against America. we warned President Bush th at he was being lured into a trap baited for him by neocons that could cost him his office and cause America to forfeit years of peace won for us by the sacrifices of two generations... And for it, George W Bush, his War Cabinet, and t he neoconservatives who plotted and planned this war for a decade bear f ull responsibility. And the returns from his mid-life co nversion to neoconservatism are now in: A guerrilla war in Iraq is dividing and bleeding America with no end i n sight. It carries the potential for chaos, civil war, and the dissolu tion of that country. Balkanization of America and the looming bankruptcy of California as p overty and crime rates soar from an annual invasion of indigent illegal s is forcing native-born Californians to flee the state for the first t ime since gold was found at Sutters Mill. A fiscal deficit of 4 percent of GDP and merchandise trade deficit of 6 percent of GDP have produced a falling dollar, the highest level of f oreign indebtedness in US history, and the loss of one of every six m anufacturing jobs since Bush took office. If Bush loses, his conversion to neoconservatism, the Arian heresy of the American Right, will have killed his presidency. Yet, in the contest be tween Bush and Kerry, I am compelled to endorse the president of the Uni ted States. Because, while Bush and Kerry are both wrong on Iraq, S haron, NAFTA, the WTO, open borders, affirmative action, amnesty, free t rade, foreign aid, and Big Government, Bush is right on taxes, judges, s overeignty, and values. The only compelling argument for endorsing Kerry is to punish Bush for Ir aq. Though he calls Iraq a colossal error, the wrong war in th e wrong place at the wrong time, he has said he wouldeven had he known Saddam had no role in 9/11 and no WMDvote the same way today. Assuredly, a president who plunged us into an unnecessary and ruinous war must be held accountable. But a vote for Kerry is more than just a vote to punish Bush. For Kerry is a man who came home from Vietnam to slime the soldiers, sail ors, Marines, and POWs he left behind as war criminals who engaged in se rial atrocities with the full knowledge of their superior officers. His conduct was as treasonous as that of Jane Fonda and disqualifies him fro m ever being commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the United States . As senator, he voted to undermine the policy of Ronald Reagan that brough t us victory in the Cold War. He has voted against almost every weapon i n the US arsenal. Though a Catholic who professes to believe life begi ns at conception, he backs abortion on demand. He has opposed the conser vative judges Bush has named to the US appellate courts. His plans for national health insurance and new spending would bankrupt America. He is a globalist and a multilateralist who would sign us on to the Kyoto Protocol and International Criminal Court. His stand s on Iraq are about as coherent as a self-portrait by Jackson Pollock. With Kerry as president, William Rehnquist could be succeeded as chief ju stice by Hillary Clinton. Every associate justice Kerry named would be c ut from the same bolt of cloth as Warren, Brennan, Douglas, Blackmun, an d Ginsburg. Should Kerry win, the courts will remain a battering ram of social revolution and the conservative drive in Congress to restrict the jurisdiction of all federal courts, including the Supreme Court, will d ie an early death. I cannot endorse the candidate of Michael Moore, George Soros, and Barbra Streisand, nor endorse a course of action that would put this political windsurfer into the presidency, no matter how deep our disagreement wit h the fiscal, foreign, immigration, and trade policies of George W Bush . As Barry Goldwater said in 1960, in urging conservatives to set aside the ir grievances and unite behind the establishment party of Eisenhower, Ro ckefeller, and Lodge, the Republican Party is our home. If an authentic conservatism rooted in the values of faith, family, community, and country is ever again to become the guiding light of nat ional policy, it will have to come through a Republican administration. The Democratic Party of Kerry, Edwards, Clinton & Clinton is a lost cause : secularist, socialist, and statist to the core. While Ralph Nader is a man of principle and political cour age, he is of the populist Left. The Constitution Party is the party closest to this magazine in philosoph y and policy prescriptions, and while one must respect votes for Michael Peroutka by those who live in Red or Blue states, we cannot counsel suc h votes in battleground states. For this election has come down to Bush or Kerry, and on life, guns, judg es, taxes, sovereignty, and defense, Bush is far better. Moreover, insid e the Republican Party, a rebellion is stirring. Tom Tancredo is leading the battle for defense of our borders. While only a handful of Republic ans stood with us against the war in Iraq, many now concede that we were right. As Franklin Foer writes in the New York Times, our America First foreign policy is now being given a second look by a conservative movem ent disillusioned with neoconservative warmongering and Wilsonian interv entionism. There is a rumbling of dissent inside the GOP to the free-trade fanaticis m of the Wall Street Journal that is denuding the nation of manufacturin g and alienating Reagan Democrats. The celebrants of outsourcing in the White House have gone into cloister. Prodigal Republicans now understand that their cohab itation with Big Government has brought their country to the brink of ru in and bought them nothing. But if we wish to be involved in the struggl e for the soul of the GOPand we intend to be therewe cannot be AWOL fr om the battle where the fate of that party is decided. The liberal establishment that mar ched us into Vietnam evaded punishment for its loss of nerve and failure of will to winby dumping LBJ, defecting to the childrens crusade to give peace a chance, then sabotaging Nixon every step of the way out of Vietnam until they broke his presidency in Watergate. Ensuring America s defeat, they covered their tracks by denouncing their own war as Nixo ns War. If Kerry wins, leading a party that detests this war, he will be forced t o execute an early withdrawal. Should that bring about a debacle, neocon s will indict Democrats for losing Iraq. The cakewalk crowd cannot be pe rmitted to get out from under this disaster that easily. They steered Bu sh into this war and should be made to see it through to the end and to preside over the withdrawal or retreat. Only thus can this neo-Jacobin ideology be discredited in Americ as eyes. It is essential for the country and our cause that it be repud iated by the Republican Party formally and finally. The neocons must cle an up the mess they have made, themselves, in full public view. A presidential election is a Hatfield-McCoy thing, a tribal affair. No matter the quarrels insi de the family, when the shooting starts, you come home to your own. When the Redcoats approached New Orleans to sunder the Union and Jackson was stacking cotton bales and calling for help from any quarter, the pirate Lafitte wrote to the governor of Lo... |
| drudgereport.com The staff is planning to do several stories on this and not just one big article. For days now, the NYT has been chasing down the rumors of what the LA TIMES may be investigating about Carter but didn't have much success. Finally, this afternoon, the NYT made some headway, at least enough to rush out a story. |