Would someone please explain to me why FOX News insists on using this type of a person as a guest? Why are so few bloggers determined to condemn Buchanan like Little Green Footballs is? So is Victor Davis Hanson. Wizbang is part of that group. Gateway has declared him a Nazi tool! The article is being applauded by white supremacist, neo-Nazi leaners like Vanguard. Stormfront is pleased.
NOTE: Some of The Pink Flamingo articles I am referencing below have been hacked. I’ve not had time to clean up the links. If you find an article where the link is “broken”, simply delete the “20%” code at the end of the link and it works. I thought the damage was limited, but I’m now discovering how insidious it actually is.
CONSERVATIVE ANGER AND JOHN MCCAIN
For two years I’ve been telling you – like some broken record, that there are conservatives who are not Republicans. There is a very nasty brand of conservative pretending to be Republican because they don’t have the honor or intellectual courage to step out and stand on their own. I think they have this systemic hatred of the GOP, which you can see in this piece by Jim Kouri that comes via the Alan Keyes scam network of money suckers. They claim conservative anger with be John McCain’s downfall. There are so many problems here.
The place to start is immigration reform. It all goes back to immigration reform, John Tanton, Sun Myung Moon, and Patrick J. Buchanan. And yes – in many ways they all link together. I’ve been telling you this for ages, but yet have been recently castigated about it. Another funny thing, the blogs who castigated me for exposing these people are the ones who are being silent about how abjectly wrong all of this is. Makes you think, doesn’t it?
Just look at what Bob Barr is doing.
BUCHANAN’S VIEWS NOT NEW
Pat Buchanan’s neo-nazi views are not new. For over a decade individuals have been “blowing the whistle” on Buchanan and his leanings. The problem is, conservatives don’t like to have their little tin gods exposed. When expose is attempted, the messenger is usually “shot”. How about this column from 1977?
But Hitler’s success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path. Men like Chamberlain and Daladier needed a moral justification for their acts of weakness and betrayal. They needed to believe they were making minor concessions, doing the right thing, to preserve the larger good — the peace of Europe. Hitler generously provided those justifications. Had he preached at Munich in 1933 of his New Order, a thousand-year-old Reich where the Jew would be exterminated, the ‘lesser’ peoples enslaved, and the German would rule, East and West Europe might have united to destroy him. Instead he cloaked each of his territorial seizures in the rhetoric of rationality and righteousness. When his battalions marched into the Rhineland, even the liberal British Lord Lothian declared, ‘The Germans, after all, are only going into their own back garden.’
To those who protested the Anschluss, Hitler could reply that a plebiscite was subsequently conducted, which showed 99 per cent of the German and Austrian people approving annexation. Even at Munich, Hitler could appeal to the principle of self-determination. After all, why should Britain and German go to war to deny several million Sudeten Germans the right to link politically with their ethnic brothers in Berlin rather than their Czech rulers in Prague?
Today, we condemn Chamberlain as the arch appeaser. But today we listen attentively as the Sinologists who follow John K. Fairbank and A. Doak Barnet argue for turning over 17 million people on Taiwan to the control of their ethnic brothers who rule the mainland — to remove the principal irritant in Washington-Peking relations. Where is the moral distinction? Even in the Polish crisis which led to World War II, Hitler’s case was not without cogency. After all, Danzig was a German city, separated, like East Prussia, from Greater Germany by an artificially created Polish corridor. Hitler’s case for eliminating this artificial division of his country was at least as persuasive as Panama’s case for eliminating the artificial division of its territory by the Canal Zone. Almost alone among European statesmen, Churchill saw that — under the guise of restoring Germany to her rightful place among nations — Hitler was marching along the road toward a New Order where Western civilization would not survive. …”
GETTING AWAY WITH “NAZI”
Pat Buchanan has been getting away with this for at least 31 years. THIRTY ONE YEARS. Anyone who ever made apologizes for him, or ever ignored his writings ought to be ashamed of themselves. Conservatives were so taken with him, and with Ross Perot, in 1992 they allowed Bill Clinton to win above George H. W. Bush. The same thing is going on today, only the players have different faces – same agendas. (Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin). Are conservatives going to be so disgustedly stupid that they allow Barack Obama to be elected? When the neo-Nazi sympathiers who managed the WTimes for years have been allowed to manipulate conservative opinion, we have a problem. The problem is if anyone dared to expose Buchanan and his leanings they were castigated.
BUCHANAN ON FOX
Why is Pat Buchanan allowed on FOX as a viable commentator? We know what the man is. Who on FOX agrees with his point of view? Are they passing Buchanan off as “right” – or GOP to balance left? If so, Republicans are in deep you now what! The problem is Pat Buchanan is not the only Nazi symathizer in the woodpile over at FOX. Sean Hannity has a friendship with Hal Turner, one of the top young neo-Nazis in the country. In fact, Turner is the one raising money for the San Diego Minutemen to go out and shoot Mexicans!
Are good people going to stand by and do nothing, or are people like Buchanan finally going to be excommunicated from polite society the way they should be?