Buchanan Speaks Out: Who here is listening?
- Thread starter Paul Revere
- Start date
That's OK. I don't think the couch potatoes would pay any attention anyway. Evidently, you're post doesn't get much attention either.jeffelkins
New member
I like Pat. I had the pleasure of speaking with him in Columbia South Carolina 5 years ago and found him to be a genuinely frendly individual with a great sense of humor.
I think he's dead-right regarding foriegn policy and dead-wrong on trade policy.
I think he's dead-right regarding foriegn policy and dead-wrong on trade policy.
Who's listening to Pat? Probably just enough folks to throw away their votes and elect Algore. That's precisely how Bush, Sr. lost to Clinton, you may recall. American elections are always lesser-of-evils deals, and this one is no exception. Wishing otherwise won't change it. If you want the next three Supreme Court justices appointed by Algore, then vote for Buchanan. The GOP is in deep, deep trouble and Algore will be the beneficiary.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> How simple, ya can’t
get nothin past DC.[/quote]
True, but I don't think the context referred to me
There are a few folks that speak to our hearts, but what can we do? We aren't liberals..we want what we want NOW. Liberals band behind their front runner and lay pressure behind the scene. We don't, we are stupid.....we expect common sense, fairplay, and our total desires. We expect honesty and truth...liberals will accept anything out of anybody if they can win. Liberals think long term, we don't...we want it all fixed instantly and, hence, we are stupid.
We have a felon, liar, pervert as a President...and we have a dumb, psychopathic liar as a vice-president.....and these two pathetic specimens of America are in charge. But, the liberal/socialist agenda is an advancing juggernaut with these shameful men in charge.
Women, Ms, feminists support a blatant sexual predator because with him in charge, they can sacrefice an individual(s) for the overall political gain.
Liberals always work and exert pressure...we don't. Thats why they make the gains....we quit after an election...they are always working and pressuring.....and thats why they can support (overwhelmingly) these punks, wimps, perverts and liars.
Incrementalism is the key...the Lord's truth and we are too stupid to see it.
We want it all right this minute
------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
get nothin past DC.[/quote]
True, but I don't think the context referred to me
There are a few folks that speak to our hearts, but what can we do? We aren't liberals..we want what we want NOW. Liberals band behind their front runner and lay pressure behind the scene. We don't, we are stupid.....we expect common sense, fairplay, and our total desires. We expect honesty and truth...liberals will accept anything out of anybody if they can win. Liberals think long term, we don't...we want it all fixed instantly and, hence, we are stupid.
We have a felon, liar, pervert as a President...and we have a dumb, psychopathic liar as a vice-president.....and these two pathetic specimens of America are in charge. But, the liberal/socialist agenda is an advancing juggernaut with these shameful men in charge.
Women, Ms, feminists support a blatant sexual predator because with him in charge, they can sacrefice an individual(s) for the overall political gain.
Liberals always work and exert pressure...we don't. Thats why they make the gains....we quit after an election...they are always working and pressuring.....and thats why they can support (overwhelmingly) these punks, wimps, perverts and liars.
Incrementalism is the key...the Lord's truth and we are too stupid to see it.
We want it all right this minute
------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" RKBA!
The other day, I saw the speech on CSPAN2. To those who criticise Buchanan for hurting Bush's chances, Buchanan reminded folks that 1996 he brought to the Republican convention 3,000,000 votes, yet wasn't even welcome to that convention. Likewise, he participated in writing the Republican platform; Nevertheless, the nominee, Bob Dole, after the fact, said bluntly he was not bound by that platform and doesn't support it. Who's representing the 3,000,000 folks who voted for me?, Buchanan asked?
The spectacle was what happened after the speech and Buchanan was taking questions from Harvard students. Immediately and throughout the "crossfire", Buchanan spent the entire time defending himself from a smear campaign conducted by leftist students designed to put the candidate on the defensive. Buchanan, well versed in handling simular abuse, weaved and manuvuered quite gracefully and to the TV audience looked quite polished. See www.gopatgo.org for transcripts on the speech. Very interesting stuff. One could see first hand the kind of abuse the man has to deal with amidst scarce media coverage. One student naively asked Buchanan to reconcile his views with what they as students at Harvard are learning, multiculturalism, internationalism and other leftist ideas from the '60's. At one point, Buchanan just chuckled and said something to the effect of, 'well, there are alot of people who don't like my views, but then again, there are alot of people who don't like YOUR VIEWS either.' An eerie silence pervaded the room. Anyhow, it was an excellent speech and I recommend one read it at Buchanan's website www.gopatgo.org.
The spectacle was what happened after the speech and Buchanan was taking questions from Harvard students. Immediately and throughout the "crossfire", Buchanan spent the entire time defending himself from a smear campaign conducted by leftist students designed to put the candidate on the defensive. Buchanan, well versed in handling simular abuse, weaved and manuvuered quite gracefully and to the TV audience looked quite polished. See www.gopatgo.org for transcripts on the speech. Very interesting stuff. One could see first hand the kind of abuse the man has to deal with amidst scarce media coverage. One student naively asked Buchanan to reconcile his views with what they as students at Harvard are learning, multiculturalism, internationalism and other leftist ideas from the '60's. At one point, Buchanan just chuckled and said something to the effect of, 'well, there are alot of people who don't like my views, but then again, there are alot of people who don't like YOUR VIEWS either.' An eerie silence pervaded the room. Anyhow, it was an excellent speech and I recommend one read it at Buchanan's website www.gopatgo.org.
Paul Revere
New member
Since I do not profess to be a political tactician like some other TFL members, I will vote on something infinitely more valuable...PRINCIPLE.
I'd bet that if a guy as politically pro-gun as Larry Pratt (GOA, president) was running for president of the U.S., there'd be this contingent of gun owners (some TFLers) that would purposely NOT vote for him, because "he would just give our votes to the Democrats". It is human nature to ask for a persian carpet for our jail cells, rather than a key to free us. Where have American's principles gone?
Our Constitutional train has jumped off the track, and is roaring towards a concrete embankment (called tyranny). But instead of looking for a way off this train, some of you are looking for better accomodations in the sleeper car.
I'd bet that if a guy as politically pro-gun as Larry Pratt (GOA, president) was running for president of the U.S., there'd be this contingent of gun owners (some TFLers) that would purposely NOT vote for him, because "he would just give our votes to the Democrats". It is human nature to ask for a persian carpet for our jail cells, rather than a key to free us. Where have American's principles gone?
Our Constitutional train has jumped off the track, and is roaring towards a concrete embankment (called tyranny). But instead of looking for a way off this train, some of you are looking for better accomodations in the sleeper car.
p220fortyfive
New member
The road to an Al Gore Presidency is paved with good intentions and votes on principle.
As your guns, books, and finally you are thrown into the fire, you can rest assured that you acted on principle.
The days of morals, honor and principle are over people. It is time to get mean and dirty, or get eaten alive.
As your guns, books, and finally you are thrown into the fire, you can rest assured that you acted on principle.
The days of morals, honor and principle are over people. It is time to get mean and dirty, or get eaten alive.
jeffelkins
New member
I am continually amused by posts that imply a Republican president will be the savior of RKBA, appoint 'good' Supremes, etc.
Since when?
Who appointed Justice Souter? GHW Bush.
Who originally banned the 'evil' black guns? GHW Bush.
Who was Daddy Bush's closest advisor and enforcer? His son, the Shrub.
Who confirmed every Clinton-appointed judge? A Republican Congress.
An argument could be made that Algore would be better than Bush, given a Republican Congress. At least some degree of gridlock might slow down the destruction of our rights.
Another argument could be made that having an Algore attempt to destroy the 2nd. might finally wake up America.
All you Bush and Rush-lovers, let's see where we are at the end of a first Bush administration. I'll wager it's much worse than right now.
Look for:
1. Photo ID/Registration for all handgun owners.
2. Total ban on high capacity magazines.
3. Required home storage standards.
4. Restricted to one gun/month purchase.
5. 500 round ammo limit for storage in a home. Not per gun, 500 rounds total.
6. Heavy federal tax on ammunition.
7. Ban on common carrier shipment of ammunition: no more Internet sales.
8. Ban on Internet purchase of firearms.
Sorry to sound so bleak, but this is the future under Republicrats.
[This message has been edited by jeffelkins (edited March 21, 2000).]
Since when?
Who appointed Justice Souter? GHW Bush.
Who originally banned the 'evil' black guns? GHW Bush.
Who was Daddy Bush's closest advisor and enforcer? His son, the Shrub.
Who confirmed every Clinton-appointed judge? A Republican Congress.
An argument could be made that Algore would be better than Bush, given a Republican Congress. At least some degree of gridlock might slow down the destruction of our rights.
Another argument could be made that having an Algore attempt to destroy the 2nd. might finally wake up America.
All you Bush and Rush-lovers, let's see where we are at the end of a first Bush administration. I'll wager it's much worse than right now.
Look for:
1. Photo ID/Registration for all handgun owners.
2. Total ban on high capacity magazines.
3. Required home storage standards.
4. Restricted to one gun/month purchase.
5. 500 round ammo limit for storage in a home. Not per gun, 500 rounds total.
6. Heavy federal tax on ammunition.
7. Ban on common carrier shipment of ammunition: no more Internet sales.
8. Ban on Internet purchase of firearms.
Sorry to sound so bleak, but this is the future under Republicrats.
[This message has been edited by jeffelkins (edited March 21, 2000).]
Byron,
I suppose it is hard to see the damage that your friends cause us. Repulicans (excepting about 4) have been more injurious to us than Democrats. Bush will only sell us out worse. I want algore. At least with algore, the economy will go bad, because it is going to go south no matter who's in office. Let algore get the credit. Further, allow algore to try for all the gun control he wants, at least a republican congress can refuse to pass legislation, refuse to confirm supreme court justices, impeach sitting federal judges who legislate from the bench...
But wait, Couldn't they have been doing all of this already? It is hard to imagine that after 6 years of congressional control, the Republicans have not impeached more than 3 Federal Judges, and they have confirmed Ruth Bader Ginsburg. What have the republicans done for you? I would say they've done nothing. I can't wait 'til GW gets elected, and the gun bans start comming. At least I'll be able to say "I told you so". You will probably be thinking how you did it all to save your guns, but I think you should evaluate some of GW's statements prior to rushing out to the ballot box.
GHW Bush didn't lose votes to Buccannan or to Perot, or anybody else. GHW Bush decided that instead of drifting further to the right to pick up more libertarian party votes, more reform party votes as well as votes from the other parties like the US Taxpayer's party, the Constitution Party, and the Greens (I know, they're lefties, but they're actually so far left they're starting to show up on the right.). Instead GW will slide left hoping that he'll steal some Democrat liberal votes. Won't happen. Never has. Whoever is giving the advice to move left during the elections is a moron. If Republicans weren't so far left already, the Libertarian Party wouldn't be swelling it's ranks like it is. These are ideological refugees from the Republican Party that sold them out. I'd personally like to see Pat steal votes from GW, I'd like to see the Republican Party disolved, as they are utterly Useless, and they are taking seats away from Libertarians. It'll never happen, and he is disagreeable to some of my Libertarian points of view, so Harry Browne- Here I come!!!!!
PS: It isn't about winning. It is about my rights. I vote my conscience, and all you idiots who do not vote your conscience have already given up on our constitution. "May the chains rest lightly on your wrists, and may our posterity forget you were our countrymen".
If you vote republican, you're taking away votes from Harry Browne!
I suppose it is hard to see the damage that your friends cause us. Repulicans (excepting about 4) have been more injurious to us than Democrats. Bush will only sell us out worse. I want algore. At least with algore, the economy will go bad, because it is going to go south no matter who's in office. Let algore get the credit. Further, allow algore to try for all the gun control he wants, at least a republican congress can refuse to pass legislation, refuse to confirm supreme court justices, impeach sitting federal judges who legislate from the bench...
But wait, Couldn't they have been doing all of this already? It is hard to imagine that after 6 years of congressional control, the Republicans have not impeached more than 3 Federal Judges, and they have confirmed Ruth Bader Ginsburg. What have the republicans done for you? I would say they've done nothing. I can't wait 'til GW gets elected, and the gun bans start comming. At least I'll be able to say "I told you so". You will probably be thinking how you did it all to save your guns, but I think you should evaluate some of GW's statements prior to rushing out to the ballot box.
GHW Bush didn't lose votes to Buccannan or to Perot, or anybody else. GHW Bush decided that instead of drifting further to the right to pick up more libertarian party votes, more reform party votes as well as votes from the other parties like the US Taxpayer's party, the Constitution Party, and the Greens (I know, they're lefties, but they're actually so far left they're starting to show up on the right.). Instead GW will slide left hoping that he'll steal some Democrat liberal votes. Won't happen. Never has. Whoever is giving the advice to move left during the elections is a moron. If Republicans weren't so far left already, the Libertarian Party wouldn't be swelling it's ranks like it is. These are ideological refugees from the Republican Party that sold them out. I'd personally like to see Pat steal votes from GW, I'd like to see the Republican Party disolved, as they are utterly Useless, and they are taking seats away from Libertarians. It'll never happen, and he is disagreeable to some of my Libertarian points of view, so Harry Browne- Here I come!!!!!
PS: It isn't about winning. It is about my rights. I vote my conscience, and all you idiots who do not vote your conscience have already given up on our constitution. "May the chains rest lightly on your wrists, and may our posterity forget you were our countrymen".
If you vote republican, you're taking away votes from Harry Browne!
It's about winning, kjm. I'm philosophically libertarian, and I like Harry Browne very much. But I only get one vote and I'm not nearly foolish enough to waste it on him. But if it will make you feel good to vote for Browne, that's your sacred privilege. Fortunately for the rest of us, there will be some correspondingly highly-principled person on the Left who will dump his vote on Ralph Nader instead of voting for Algore.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The Democrats will simply move to ban private ownership of all guns except perhaps Steven Spielberg's skeet gun.
That's what will happen. So put on your tinfoil hat and cast a direct or indirect vote for Gore.
That's what will happen. So put on your tinfoil hat and cast a direct or indirect vote for Gore.
David Roberson
New member
By all means, vote Republican. Gov. Pataki and Mayor Giuliani are fine defenders of the Second Amendment, right?
Anyone who think the Republicans value RKBA any more than the Democrats do hasn't been paying attention for quite a few years.
Anyone who think the Republicans value RKBA any more than the Democrats do hasn't been paying attention for quite a few years.
We don't need all Republicans to be RKBA. All we need is a majority. This majority will then elect leaders like Trent Lott and Tom Delay who will block gun control.
However if you vote for a Democrat, even one who believes in RKBA, he will vote for Dick Gebhart and Tom Daschel as leaders. Dick and Tom will then do what they can to take our gun rights away.
It is that simple.
If you vote 3rd party you are just siphoning away votes that could have gone to electing a leadership that will block the gun grabbers.
Its easy for 3rd parties that don't have a chance of winning to take principled positions. If they ever had a shot at forming a majority - you would see these 3rd parties compromising left and right.
However if you vote for a Democrat, even one who believes in RKBA, he will vote for Dick Gebhart and Tom Daschel as leaders. Dick and Tom will then do what they can to take our gun rights away.
It is that simple.
If you vote 3rd party you are just siphoning away votes that could have gone to electing a leadership that will block the gun grabbers.
Its easy for 3rd parties that don't have a chance of winning to take principled positions. If they ever had a shot at forming a majority - you would see these 3rd parties compromising left and right.
Well, I don't know about Pat being a 'nazi sympathizer', Mr Pub. Now, really. That sounds abit extreme, a statement one might expect from someone from the extreme left like Mr. Dershowitz (did I spell it correctly?).
Nevertheless, after hearing Pat take questions from ultra-left students at Harvard as I mentioned above, I have to say there will always be that small, noisy crowd who have to resort to nasty comments about a good, upstanding political leader like Mr. Buchanan.
Since you don't share much company, though, with your fellow comrades at Harvard on the gun issue, my advise to you is why don't you try to get your guy, John McCain, to run for the Reform Party nomination? I would love to see that viewpoint run out of the Reform Party convention.
Unfortunately, I think our good old friend John already figured he'd better stick with the Senate instead. Wise choice, John. There, he can at least ride abit longer on those media laurels!
As for George, I think he's too politically astute to say something too negative about a popular politician like Pat Buchanan. On the debates, most folks feel the Reform Party should be represented in the debates. If you don't believe it, check out http://205.252.89.138/new/speeches/debate_complaint_quotes.htm.
Nevertheless, after hearing Pat take questions from ultra-left students at Harvard as I mentioned above, I have to say there will always be that small, noisy crowd who have to resort to nasty comments about a good, upstanding political leader like Mr. Buchanan.
Since you don't share much company, though, with your fellow comrades at Harvard on the gun issue, my advise to you is why don't you try to get your guy, John McCain, to run for the Reform Party nomination? I would love to see that viewpoint run out of the Reform Party convention.
Unfortunately, I think our good old friend John already figured he'd better stick with the Senate instead. Wise choice, John. There, he can at least ride abit longer on those media laurels!
As for George, I think he's too politically astute to say something too negative about a popular politician like Pat Buchanan. On the debates, most folks feel the Reform Party should be represented in the debates. If you don't believe it, check out http://205.252.89.138/new/speeches/debate_complaint_quotes.htm.
And another thing...who wants the Reform Party to be included in the Presidential debates? If you say yes, you share company with Bill Bradley, John Kasich, Alan Keyes, John McCain, Steve Forbes, Gary Bauer, Jesse Ventura, Mario Cuomo, Jack Kemp, John McLaughlin, Eleanor Clift, Margaret Carlson, Robert Novak, George Will, Arianna Huffington, Ralph Nader, The Seattle Times, The Las Vegas Review Journal, the Fort Lauderdale Sentinel and the Portland Press Herald. See for yourself at www.gopatgo.org under the heading 'On the Record'.
Covert Mission
New member
jeffelkins:
Your list of possible things to come SO depresses me, I could cry.
Your list of possible things to come SO depresses me, I could cry.
Well first of all Cleancut, I've been a Republican since Ronald Reagan. Not reform party. I'm a conservative, but more libetarian on social issues. I considered voted for McCain, but ended up voting for Bush in the primary. I objected to an earlier post that I thought disgracefully tried to smear McCain's record as a POW.
Was I harsh in stating that Buchanan is a Nazi symphathizer? Sure. But, I don't think that I am too far off base. In his books and speeches Pat seems to go out of his way to make excuses for the Nazis/Germans during World War II.
And if someone can't poll at least 15% I don't see why he should be in the debates with Bush. Otherwise, perhaps you and I should also be included in the debates.
Was I harsh in stating that Buchanan is a Nazi symphathizer? Sure. But, I don't think that I am too far off base. In his books and speeches Pat seems to go out of his way to make excuses for the Nazis/Germans during World War II.
And if someone can't poll at least 15% I don't see why he should be in the debates with Bush. Otherwise, perhaps you and I should also be included in the debates.