From Pat Buchanan.......
Walter Karmazyn
says, but there's some food for thought mixed in below, imo.
W
September 9, 2004
Terrorism Is the Price of Empire
by Patrick J. Buchanan
Pat Buchanan spoke with Bill Maher on Sept. 3 about Iraq and the "War on
Terror." The following is a transcript from Real Time With Bill Maher.
MAHER: First of all, if Osama bin Laden was captured and killed today, it
would have the same effect on terrorism as Ray Kroc had dying for
McDonald's. [laughter] [applause] They have already built the franchises.
Ray Kroc doesn't need to be alive to sell more McDonald's hamburgers. But
I've got to go to – I want to talk to Pat Buchanan. I've wanted to talk to
him for 12 years. He's been resisting me. He finally said he'd do this show.
We got him on the satellite. He's an MSNBC political commentator. He was, of
course, the senior advisor to Nixon, Ford and Reagan, and then ran three
times for president himself. His new book is Where the Right Went Wrong.
Patrick Buchanan, ladies and gentlemen. [applause] How are you, Mr.
Buchanan?
PATRICK BUCHANAN [via satellite]: I'm doing fine, Bill.
MAHER: All right. I have been wanting to talk to you for a long time. I'm
always fascinated by the way your positions somehow wind up, even though you
are an archconservative, on the left. For example, you are very much against
this war in Iraq , that we were just talking about. You called it – you
said, "Terrorism is the price of empire." That's something Michael Moore
might say.
BUCHANAN: Well, I think it's something the British might say when they were
driven out of Palestine, the French might say when they were driven out of
Algeria. Quite simply, in this modern world, if you try to rule other
peoples, even to alter them, make them democratic or force them to change
their ways to conform to your own, you're going to have a serious problem
with those people. They're going to fight, just like the American
revolutionaries fought against the British Empire. [applause] We ought to
know that. We were the first – we were the first people to rise up against
an empire.
MAHER: So when we were so against the French, maybe they knew something, is
that what you're saying? Maybe the people who had colonial empires like the
French and the British people – although not their prime minister – and the
Germans, maybe they were trying to tell us something because they had more
experience?
BUCHANAN: Oh, I think that's right. I think that – but I think the president
did the right thing in having to go into Afghanistan and take down the
Taliban and go after Osama bin Laden. They had come over to our country and
killed our people. I think where we made a mistake was invading a sovereign
country. It was led by a thug and a criminal, but they had had no role in
9/11. They did not want war with us. [applause] They did not attack us. They
could not injure the United States of America . And we sent an army up to
Baghdad . And as I warned the president again and again, in columns in our
new magazine, "Look, we're going to get up there, and after three weeks,
we're going to inherit our own West Bank, only it's going to be 25 million
Iraqis." And that's exactly what's happened. [applause]
MAHER: Speaking of Israel , Tom Delay this week equated what's going on in
Israel with the rest of the war on terror. He said they are pretty much one
and the same. I'm wondering what you think of that. I'm wondering if you
think it's disturbing that we have a born-again president who believes that
the return of Jesus is imminent, and when he returns, he's going to want to
go home; he's going to go to Jerusalem; he's not going to wind up in Ohio.
[laughter] And therefore, I think Bush's religious convictions have
something to do with his political convictions about that country of Israel
.
BUCHANAN: You know, I don't know exactly – clearly, his religious
convictions, which I respect and admire on the president's part, reinforce
his views with regard to Israel . But I believe the mistake the president is
making is outsourcing American Middle East policy to Ariel Sharon.
[applause] But the problem here, Bill, is this: the problem is that on the
war in Iraq , which I think was a mistake, the president does believe in it
deeply. I do not believe John Kerry believed in this war. I don't think
Hillary Clinton did. They voted to give him a blank check to wage a war in
which they did not believe. And that is why, whether you agree or disagree
or like or don't like Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney, it is quite clear that in
their hearts, they still believe they're doing the right thing. Does John
Kerry believe that? I don't think so.
MAHER: Does that mean you're voting for Bush?
BUCHANAN: Well, you know, if it comes down to a choice between Kerry, who,
you know, really doesn't seem to – he doesn't take a strong stand against
the president's policy, like your other guest, Howard Dean, did. I don't
know why you would vote for John Kerry, even if you're like Pat Buchanan and
you believe the country is headed in the wrong direction. On immigration, I
think we ought to defend our borders. I think we ought to stop sending those
jobs overseas and keep them home. And I think we ought to stop launching
imperial wars. [applause]
MAHER: All right.
BUCHANAN: But why vote for John Kerry when he agrees with George Bush on all
three of them?
MAHER: I'll take that as a yes. [laughter] So, 12 years ago, you spoke at
the Republican National Convention.
BUCHANAN: Right.
MAHER: And you got blamed by a lot of people because you opened up this can
of worms called the "culture wars." And it amuses me because I think people
know what the culture wars are. The shorthand I use is that half the country
thinks every problem can be solved by either more guns or more Jesus, and
half the country doesn't. And there's your culture war. But it seems to me
that this President Bush is so much more of a culture warrior than his
father. How come he escapes getting blamed for that?
BUCHANAN: Well, he is more – what you've got to realize is that George Bush,
Sr., really is of Kennebunkport, and George Bush, Jr., has one foot in
Midland-Odessa. I do think he is not only credible, believable, but he is
honest, that he is a born-again Christian. I deeply respect these people.
They voted for me in the South in the primaries and helped me to a great
extent. I think, by and large, they're a beneficent force in American
politics, and I don't have any real problem with him. I agree almost with
him all the way. I do disagree on the Middle East. But, Bill, I think that
your audience ought to realize – and I know they're having a lot of laughs
at George Bush's expense – George Bush and those fellows ran a ruthless,
tough, brave, magnificent convention. They stayed focused. They paid no
attention to the media, which said you've got to be kinder, gentler. They
went after and they carved up John Kerry. And I think they may have gotten
him in a position where if he doesn't really shine in those debates, he is
toast.
MAHER: Why aren't the Democrats better at fighting back? If John Kerry this
week had said the war on terrorism is not winnable, this election would be
over, if it isn't already. How come the Democrats don't have a mechanism to
fight back the way the Republicans can do? Where are those Democratic
cojones?
BUCHANAN: Well, look, the Democrats – the Democrats in the past sometimes –
John F. Kennedy's era – they were as tough as Republicans, and even tougher
in a lot of cases. I think your problem is your candidate. The candidate
feels his party is an antiwar party and an anti-Bush party. It wanted some
red meat up there. Kerry wouldn't give it to them. None of them gave it to
them. I think Kerry's reasoning is this. He thinks, by and large, that if he
comes out antiwar, the Republicans will McGovernize him as we did, quite
frankly, with Nixon in 1972, with Senator McGovern, and he will go down the
tubes just like Dukakis and all the other liberals that ran against
conservative Republicans in the last 25 years. He is afraid to make that
move.
But I'll tell you this, Bill. I think he's going to come to a period in
October, if he is not ahead, where he's going to have to roll the dice and
say, "We're going to have to come out on this war in Iraq and differentiate
ourselves from Mr. Bush, or we're going down to defeat."
MAHER: I wish somebody would. Thank you very much.
BUCHANAN: Thank you.
MAHER: Patrick Buchanan. I hope you join us again. [applause]
COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Frndthdevl
>Usual disclaimer that I don't, by a longshot, agree with everything Pat
>says,
I also agreed with pat when he told D Ali G that we should not have went to war
over Mass Weapons of BLT
GrtflMark
>From: "Walter Karmazyn" wal...@rahul.net
>Date: 9/9/2004 12:56 AM Central Daylight Time
>Message-id: <chorat$fuf$1...@blue.rahul.net>
>
>Usual disclaimer that I don't, by a longshot, agree with everything Pat
>says, but there's some food for thought mixed in below, imo.
>
>W
>
... when you find yourself agreeing with Pat Buchanan - it's time for
introspection to ask yourself where you've gone wrong in your thinking ......
it's a red flag...
Olompali4
>introspection to ask yourself where you've gone wrong in your thinking ......
>it's a red flag...<
Buchanan is a closet Libertarian.
Progressive on human rights, conservative on economics.
He makes much more sense than right wing Jesus freaks.
nantuckets finest
>I also agreed with pat when he told D Ali G that we should not have went to
>war
>over Mass Weapons of BLT
How about Mass Weapons of Reuben?
Mark
Toad The Dead Vegan
> >Subject: From Pat Buchanan.......
> >From: "Walter Karmazyn" wal...@rahul.net
> >Date: 9/9/2004 12:56 AM Central Daylight Time
> >Message-id: <chorat$fuf$1...@blue.rahul.net>
> >Usual disclaimer that I don't, by a longshot, agree with everything Pat
> >says, but there's some food for thought mixed in below, imo.
> ... when you find yourself agreeing with Pat Buchanan - it's time for
> introspection to ask yourself where you've gone wrong in your thinking ......
> it's a red flag...
Why's that? I agree with Buchanan on a ton of stuff and have for years.
I even registered as a Republican once so I could vote for him in a
primary.
Too bad today's corporate Republicans don't have his common man--common
sense. Our national security is harmed far more by Bush's refusal to
stop the tidal wave of illegal immigration than it was by some wacky
dictator a half a world away. You know, they guy who went around
slaughtering fundamentalist Muslims and keeping their enemy philosophy
under his boot.
Falluja? Fuck Falluja, how about San Diego and El Paso?
Bush doesn't care about protecting the US; he cares more about
protecting Saudi Arabia.
Toad
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Schmoe
news:20040909081129...@mb-m12.aol.com...
Sure, pull out the "religion" card.
nantuckets finest
>Date: 9/9/2004 2:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <A810d.9576$bE1.5...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
Ok, fine, how about Weapons of Mass Chourico?
Mark
LP
Walter Karmazyn wrote:
>
> Usual disclaimer that I don't, by a longshot, agree with everything Pat
> says, but there's some food for thought mixed in below, imo.
Agreed. I do not find myself a repub (or a dem) nor conservative or
liberal. I hate labels. I used to "hate" Buchanan for what I thought
he represented - but today the guy makes some valid points about this
situation.
LP
Seth Jackson
wrote:
Only Mass Weapons of Cherise.
- Seth Jackson
Songwriting & Music Business Info: http://www.sethjackson.net
volkfolk
"LP" <lpe...@hotmailBush.com> wrote in message
news:4140A92A...@hotmailBush.com...
The irony of being someone with no political affiliation and no party
loyalty is that I often can see valid points from both sides. What makes it
even more painful is when we have such pathetic choices from both parties,
Buchanan has been making a lot of sense lately, and while I find some of his
views pretty offensive (Gay rights and abortion rights being the biggest
ones) I find myself in complete agreement with his current analysis of the
"neocons" and their ill advised war in Iraq
Scot
nantuckets finest
>Date: 9/9/2004 3:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: <chq9u2$cq5$1...@pcls3.std.com>
>
>nantuckets finest <mth...@aol.combiteme> wrote:
>>>"Schmoe" wrote:
>>>Date: 9/9/2004 2:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time
>>>Message-id: <A810d.9576$bE1.5...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
>>>
>>>"nantuckets finest" <mth...@aol.combiteme> wrote in message
>>>news:20040909081129...@mb-m12.aol.com...
>>>>
>>>>>I also agreed with pat when he told D Ali G that we should not have went
>>>>>to
>>>>>war
>>>>>over Mass Weapons of BLT
>>>>
>>>> How about Mass Weapons of Reuben?
>>>
>>
>>Ok, fine, how about Weapons of Mass Chourico?
>
Only the part of RI that is close to Fall River and New Beige....
Over here in south county they've never heard of the stuff. Their loss, those
pigs eyeballs and assholes are great!
Mark