The “Isms” That Bedevil Bush
On reading George Bush's discourse to the New York Economic Club last week, Cicero's insight came to mind: "To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child."
With Iraq entering its sixth year, the dollar sinking to peso levels, the economy careening into recession, and 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens roosting here, Bush alerted us to what really worries him:
"I'm troubled by isolationism and protectionism ... (and) another 'ism,' and that's nativism. And that's what happened throughout our history. And probably the most grim reminder of what can happen to America during periods of isolationism and protectionism is what happened in the late—in the '30s, when we had this America First policy and Smoot-Hawley. And look where it got us."
Let us try to sort out this dog's breakfast.
First, America was never isolationist. From its birth, the republic was a great trading nation with ties to the world. True, in 1935, 1936 and 1937, a Democratic Congress passed and FDR signed neutrality acts to keep us out of the Italo-Abyssinian and Spanish civil wars. And FDR did say, "We are not isolationist except insofar as we seek to isolate ourselves completely from war." But how did staying out of Abyssinia and Spain hurt America?
As for Smoot-Hawley, it was a tariff enacted in June 1930, nine months after the Crash of 1929, which occurred, as Milton Friedman won a Nobel Prize for proving, when the stock market bubble, caused by the Fed's easy money policy, burst. Smoot-Hawley had nothing to do with a Depression that began in 1929 and lasted through FDR's first two terms. This is a liberal myth, probably taught to Mr. Bush by New Deal Democrats at the Milton Academy.
America First was an organization of 800,000 anti-interventionists formed at Yale in 1940 by patriots like Gerald Ford, Potter Stewart and Sargent Shriver, backed by John F. Kennedy, to check FDR's drive to war. Herbert Hoover supported it, and its greatest spokesman was the Lone Eagle, Charles Lindbergh.
But America First did not make policy. FDR did. And it was FDR who, by cutting off Japan's oil in July 1941, rebuffing Prince Konoye's offer to meet him in the Pacific or Alaska and issuing a virtual ultimatum on Nov. 26, 1941—to get out of China—that propelled Japan to its fatal decision to attack Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7.
Isolationist is an epithet used to smear those patriots who adhere to Washington's admonition to stay out of foreign wars, Jefferson's counsel to seek "peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none" and John Quincy Adams's declaration that America "goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy."
Does Bush regard these statesmen as blinkered isolationists?
Protectionism is the structuring of trade policy to protect the national sovereignty, ensure economic self-reliance and "prosper America first." It was the policy of the Republican Party from Abraham Lincoln to Calvin Coolidge. America began that era in 1860 with one half of Britain's production and ended it producing more than all of Europe put together. Is this a record to be ashamed of?
Compare protectionism's success to Bush's record.
Since 2001, he has presided over the seven largest trade deficits in history, the loss of 3.5 million manufacturing jobs and the collapse of the dollar, and added but one-fifth of the private sector jobs Bill Clinton created. Gold has gone from $260 an ounce to $1,000, oil from $28 a barrel to $100.
"Nativism" is another smear term, dating to the early 1850s and the Know-Nothing Party, which sought to halt immigration after millions of Irish flooded in after the famine of 1845. It carries a connotation of xenophobia, or the fear and hatred of foreigners.
Thus does Bush tar critics who deplore his dereliction of duty in failing to defend this nation's borders against a Third World invasion that may turn this republic into a Tower of Babel.
From 1924 to 1965, there was indeed little immigration. Does that make Coolidge, Hoover, FDR, Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower and Kennedy knuckle-dragging nativists? When JFK took office, we were as united and strong a country as we have ever been. How did we suffer from not having 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens here?
In smearing as nativists, protectionists and isolationists those who wish to stop the invasion, halt the export of factories and jobs to Asia, and stop the unnecessary wars, Bush is attacking the last true conservatives in his party.
Which is understandable. For after the judges and tax cuts, what is there about Bush that is conservative? His foreign policy is Wilsonian. His trade policy is pure FDR. His spending is LBJ all the way. His amnesty for illegals is Teddy Kennedy's policy.
Two-thirds of the nation says we are on the wrong course. Two-thirds rejects NAFTA and amnesty. Two-thirds wants out of Iraq. Two-thirds rejects Bush. Bush says that people are being misled by those wicked old isolationists, protectionists and nativists. At least he and Poppy will have something to agree on in retirement.
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
Entries(RSS)
I love Pat and agree with everything he's written. But do "Boobus Americanus"? Of course not!
After 8 years of Bush the Republicans are about to nominate a Wilsonian, Free trading, open borders fanatic who makes Bush look like Herbert Hoover.
And Judging by the Polls - he'll win! We ,might as well face it, nothing will be done about *any* of these problems. So invest your money and plan accordingly.
It will only get worse. But thanks to Pat for telling the truth.
GWB continues to illustrate how dopey and quite sinister he actually is as both a human being and a politician. His rhetoric is fodder for the lazy consumerist mind and his concern for the abstract and ideological is a rouse. GWB is back to being that bored mediocre college senior in his last semester, parroting the shibboleths of the elite Marxist professoriate.
It is laziness and incompetence for one to focus on the abstract when the concrete is cracking all around. And, yet, most "people" right or left, buy modicum of the nonsense GWB is struggling to articulate, or, at the very least, they find it not terribly offensive. Let's face it: this crap plays in the good old USA, and it makes me wonder is it worth the fight...shall we finally part the field and declare defeat. Listening to GWB and the other dopes who subscribe to this nonsense gives one the headache as painful as banging one's head against a concrete wall for fun…It's obvious that GWB enjoys doing that for fun for far too long!
It is difficult for me to hate only Bush the politician and not Bush the person as well. Of course it should be difficult, because my eyes have been opened to what is obvious: Bush is a villain, and a contemptuous and wicked one. Reading the quote from the President's speech that Pat has presented on this post has officially changed my mind on an important point, and that is that Bush is no longer just an innocent puppet with raging evil neocons like Rove, Cheney, and Wolfowitz pulling the strings. George W. Bush now truly believes all the things he allowed himself to be converted to. He knows WHAT he believes, and WHY he believes it. No more ideological molding by Cheney and company is needed. The presidential candidate who spoke beautifully of a humble foreign policy 8 long years ago . . . that is a picture of himself that he no doubt sneers at when reminded of him. Those villainous neocon enemies of the American Republic who reside at PNAC and AEI . . . the 43rd president of the United States is one of them now. Like Darth Vader, he was once a learner and now a master.
Hopefulley we will get rid of Bush this year, and then this nightmarish administration will end. The problem is that the person selected to be the next U.S. president (John McCain)
will make Bush look like a pacifist, isolationist and protectionist.
In a recent debate, John McCain was confronted with the fact that 70% of the American people are against the war in Iraq. McCains only response was: "So?"
The U.S. is not a democracy anymore. Worse, our leaders do not even PRETEND that the U.S. is a democracy anymore.
Roger,
McCain should act as he sees fit, not as the people see fit. We elect leaders to do just that.
The problem with McCain is he hates America and dreams of transforming it. And he'll do anything for power.
We need Buchanan, Dobbs, Tancredo, Hunter, Baldwin... a real American to be made President. These others are aliens who are not loyal and do not belong here. If the Know Nothings were still around, I bet their motto would be, "deport, deport, deport."
Fortunately Bush has only a short time left in office, unfortunately the short time he has left leaves us hard-pressed to enumerate and explain his many deficiencies as a president and a human being. Bush is absolutely worthless. Although an opinion, it could be easily verified as fact. I shall not waste my time, explaining to all whom read these posts my reasons for the aforementioned statement…It is an unnecessary waste of effort…
I am upset…Where is my America??? My money is worth nothing…My job is not secure…My neighborhood is over-run with third-worlders… I am not a happy-camper… Bush and his rich friends…(Repulicrats and Democans) are happy… We, the people, suffer…Screw them all…..
I am saddened by America’s lack of patriots…Where are all the true Americans…The lovers of liberty…The men given to the cause…Willing to deliver their wealth and lives for the cause of freedom…
Bush is an ignorant, stupid, jew-loving neocon…
His major concern is honoring his fealty to israel….
I have known many good, intelligent, honorable people in my life…..None are advisors to the Bushies…..Doesn’t seem just…
Flavius Claudius Julianus,
Heroes arise in times of crisis, though it's a shame more don't rise in times of peace...
Have no fear but, things will only get worse under McCain.
The days of Clinton were better than the days of Bush which will have been better than the days of McCain which...
Darkest before the dawn, though I fear we've entered a black hole.
Flavius --
Where are all the true Americans? They were run out of town in 1865.
I love Pat's commentary; but I tire of his lionizing Abe Lincoln, the first in our long line of corporate dictators.
Let's face it. Bush is not a rare type. He is only a typical Ivy Leaguer. What he believes is standard stuff for the coporate elite and "educated" Northeasterners.
A couple of corrections:
As a graduate, I'm embarrassed to say the GWB attended Phillips Academic (Andover), not Milton Academy. I'm not sure he imbibed his Kool-Aid there, although, by the time he got to Yale, he may have been in an alcoholic haze.
Bill Clinton did not "create" jobs; no President does. He may pursue economic policies that allow entrepreneurs to create jobs, but he doesn't create them. Give Clinton credit, though. He did balance the budget.
Phillips Academy.
#11 Congress balanced the budget.
@3: Bush may well believe everything he says, but that doesn't necessarily make them his own thoughts. The follies and inconsistencies of a man with no coherent worldview are wide and deep (and on this point I must mention I am eternally grateful that no one thought me important enough to record my own ramblings throughout my adolescent years!). He accepts any remotely plausible insight at face value and, failing to attach any deeper significance, jettison it the minute he comes into contact with a contrary statement (provided, of course, that the latter does not follow the former too closely).
@11: Actually I would suggest it was Yale that did it to him, or at least that finished the job that his legacy had started. Have you ever met an Ivy League graduate?
@13: "Balancing" a budget is child's play. All you're doing is cranking out extra paper notes to pay the bills and then covering up inflation by outsourcing manufacturing tasks and importing slave labour in the service sector.
"It is the absolute right of the STATE to supervise the formation of public oppinion."
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
"The lie can be maintained only for such a time as the STATE can shield the people from the political, economic, and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitallly important for the STATE to use all of it's power to repress dissent, for truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest ememy of the STATE."
.........Dr. Joseph Goebbels, German Minister Of Propoganda, 1933-1945..............
Untill America refuses the MSM official word, nothing will change.
Bush is unintelligent and incompetent, but still evil. He, like Clinton, Cheney, and all the rest, speaks only in propagandaese. This is sociopathic behaviour. Though he may half way believe the garbage he spews, it doesn't matter whether he really does or not, it just serves his evil aims. Regardless, the fact that he speaks this way on the matters of vital interest to the survival of the empire and it's subjects shows not just an unwillingness to deal with reality, but an inability to do so. This is partly due to the fact that to deal with reality would necessitate ending their evil schemes and abandoning their evil aims to do what needs to be done, which they are unwilling to do, and partly due to the fact that as they continue on this path, they become increasingly delusional, believing their own propaganda, thus unable to see or deal with the reality staring them in the face.
For this reason, he, and the rest of the political, social, and cultural elites, are becoming increasingly irrelevant. That will be to our advantage. As long as these fools stay in power, the breakup of the empire is inevitable, and so a movement like the one behind the North American Secessionist Conventions stands an increasing chance of success in the long run, as the elites eventually become as irrelevant as the Communist party elites in the USSR in 1989.
"Bush is unintelligent and incompetent, but still evil."
Oh, I'm not questioning a moral condemnation. Willful stupidity--which pretty well characterises any non-mentally handicapped human being who does not think--is a mark of depravity.
The open-ended idea of metaphysics is that the world's darkening never reaches to the light of Being. But without understanding the essence of truth is the spendor of the simple and a closed or finite set here in the world. Then the former statement in the hands of children like our leaders is a license for irresponsibility and darkness itself. It is also what is meant by the statement Satan sometimes comes as an angel of light. ... Really the two statements above are flip sides of the same one coin; but by facing one side or the other Up 'as if' that 1/2 were the whole ball of wax or coin then is evil. Bush & Co. is Evil. Even Satan isn't evil just 1/2 of a coin but is given power when treated as if the whole. It's also what is meant by Satan is God's pal in the royal court in a kind of divine sting operation. Satan in other words ferrets out the shills For evil. Sometimes posing as 'light' like Bush, or merely selling the dark side like a Cheney. Except Bush & Cheney are just shills not gods. They are mediocre and incompetent, sadistic snobs. Pelosi let them go unpunished and thus uncorrected. She also is thus Evil. She is six of one, they half-dozen of another. This is the nuts and bolts of how these actualities are and how they work regardless of the case specific culture. One (i.e. the group or whole) is not to call Evil, good. Or conversely speak evil of good. No one ESCAPSES the judgements of the actual forever in my opinion. But they certainly seem to, don't they in the finite set of this world. However there are invisible penalties paid on a personal level that observes like us can't view and sufficiently take into account...
This is how I see it. It's also been my own experience on a personal level. Good in this regard is often its own reward.
Un-freaking-believable.
Falling dollar, unpayable deficits, bankrupt and crime-ridden municipalities, endless low-grade wars, and THIS is what Bush claims keeps him up at night.
More "isms" ? Anyone who wanted to know, could have known about Mr. Bush. He hasn't changed in years. Clinton proved it is difficult to hide promiscuity in the Oval Office. Bush has proven it is equally difficult to hide ignorance and incompetence. With leaders like this, we deserve what we get.
And so, General, I want to thank you for your service. And I appreciate the fact that you really snatched defeat out of the jaws of those who are trying to defeat us in Iraq." --George W. Bush, to Army Gen. Ray Odierno, Washington, D.C., March 3, 2008
"Wait a minute. What did you just say? You're predicting $4-a-gallon gas? ... That's interesting. I hadn't heard that." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Feb. 28, 2008
"I'm oftentimes asked, What difference does it make to America if people are dying of malaria in a place like Ghana? It means a lot. It means a lot morally, it means a lot from a -- it's in our national interest." --George W. Bush, Accra, Ghana, Feb. 20, 2008
"There is no doubt in my mind when history was written, the final page will say: Victory was achieved by the United States of America for the good of the world." --George W. Bush, addressing U.S. troops at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, Jan. 12, 2008
"I can press when there needs to be pressed; I can hold hands when there needs to be -- hold hands." --George W. Bush, on how he can contribute to the Middle East peace process, Washington, D.C., Jan. 4, 2008
"In the State of the Union a couple of years ago, I addressed the issue of steroids, and the reason I did so is because I understand the impact that professional athletes can have on our nation's youth. And I just urge our -- those in the public spotlight, particularly athletes, to understand that when they violate their bodies, they're sending a terrible signal to America's young." --George W. Bush, on the baseball steroids scandal, Dec. 14, 2007
"The decisions we make in Washington have a direct impact on the people in our country, obviously." --George W. Bush, New Albany, Ind., Nov. 13, 2007
"If you've got somebody in harm's way, you want the president being -- making advice, not -- be given advice by the military, and not making decisions based upon the latest Gallup poll or focus group." --George W. Bush, New Albany, Ind., Nov. 13, 2007
"I don't particularly like it when people put words in my mouth, either, by the way, unless I say it." --George W. Bush, Crawford, Texas, Nov. 10, 2007
"In other words, he was given an option: Are you with us or are you not with us? And he made a clear decision to be with us, and he's acted on that advice." --George W. Bush, on President Pervez Musharraf, Crawford, Texas, Nov. 10, 2007
"We're going to -- we'll be sending a person on the ground there pretty soon to help implement the malaria initiative, and that initiative will mean spreading nets and insecticides throughout the country so that we can see a reduction in death of young children that -- a death that we can cure." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Oct. 18, 2007
"All I can tell you is when the governor calls, I answer his phone." --George W. Bush, San Diego, Calif., Oct. 25, 2007
"My hearts are with the Jeffcoats right now, that's what I'm thinking." --George W. Bush, after meeting with California wildfire victims Kendra and Jay Jeffcoat, San Diego, Calif., Oct. 25, 2007
"I fully understand those who say you can't win this thing militarily. That's exactly what the United States military says, that you can't win this military." --George W. Bush, on the need for political progress in Iraq, Washington, D.C., Oct. 17, 2007
"My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions." --George W. Bush, The Decider, Lancaster, Pa., Oct. 3, 2007 (Watch video clip)
"I got a lot of Ph.D.-types and smart people around me who come into the Oval Office and say, 'Mr. President, here's what's on my mind.' And I listen carefully to their advice. But having gathered the device, I decide, you know, I say, 'This is what we're going to do.'" --George W. Bush, Lancaster, Pa., Oct. 3, 2007
"You know, when you give a man more money in his pocket -- in this case, a woman more money in her pocket to expand a business, it -- they build new buildings. And when somebody builds a new building somebody has got to come and build the building. And when the building expanded it prevented additional opportunities for people to work." --George W. Bush, Lancaster, Pa., Oct. 3, 2007
etc. etc. etc.
"Falling dollar, unpayable deficits, bankrupt and crime-ridden municipalities, endless low-grade wars, and THIS is what Bush claims keeps him up at night."
What's so unbelievable? Bush, Cheney and the Washington-Manhattan Neocon axis think only of themselves. To this end, they are not themselves:
1. In danger of losing their vast fortunes,
2. In any sort of personal debt,
3. Exposed to any sort of crime without their personally hired cop entourages, or
4. Getting shelled halfway across the world.
OF COURSE the failure of their plot to import more and more alien slave labour keeps them up at night. It is the one time they might actually not get their way.
The Bush/Cheney economic record is even worse than that. The national debt has doubled. Real wages quit stagnating and actually went into decline. The top 2% are raking in their highest share of national income since 1929. Household debt has soared past Roaring Twenties levels. Wall Street strapped itself with derivative dynamite and sold CDO Squareds on subprime mortgages to the world. The Fed injected half a trillion dollars of welfare into the banks to prevent an Enron style meltdown of the U.S. economy. Yesterday, we dropped the pretense of caring about moral hazard. Ripped off foreign investors are still on strike out there. The next president will have to figure out some other way to finance the federal government.
Let’s not forget the type of jobs that have been created since 2001: bartenders, waitresses, construction work for illegal aliens, government jobs, health care workers, etc. We’re almost a decade closer to Peak Oil. T. Boone Pickens thinks we will have $150 oil in two years. How many nuclear power plants have been built? Did we see a serious effort to rebuild passenger rail or exploit America’s vast coal reserves? It took a Democratic Congress to raise fuel efficiency standards for the first time since 1975. Housing prices are still falling and the Boomers will start retiring this year.
It looks like we have a long way down to go. The faux Bush prosperity has only begun to shake out. Bernanke is cutting interest rates in response to breaches in the dike. He’s flying by the seat of his pants. Artificially keeping interest rates low is exactly the policy that created the housing debacle in the first place, but never mind, it is not like we learn from our mistakes in this country. We assume the good times will go on forever.
America is bankrupt at almost every level. The rot extends from the golden parachute executives at the top to the household budget and voting preferences of the last deluded J6P. A total failure.
The worst thing about this is that the American public, at the hands of the media, believes that Bush is a 'conservative.' They look at the fact that he is a Republican and immediately connote it with the word 'conservative' thereby perpetuating the myth that Bush is on the so called 'right.' He is not. He may not take the Democrat line on every issue (taxes and judges) but he takes it on most. If the American public would get this notion of left/right horizontal politics out of its head then maybe people would understand that 1) Bush is a liberal 2) Neo-conservatives are not the same as conservatives and 3) Being against the war does not immediately classify you as a Marxist.
This will probably never happen as long as the so called conservatives on TV remain so shallow and semi-liberal themselves. You can never discuss philosophy or history on TV, only Obama and Hillary.
Clyde Wilson: Bush is not a rare type. He is only a typical Ivy Leaguer. What he believes is standard stuff for the coporate elite and “educated” Northeasterners.
It was Southerners and Southern descendants in the West who elected and re-elected Bush. Just as long as you say "Jesus" a lot you can get a way with a lot with Southerners.
Besides read what PB wrote: America First was an organization of 800,000 anti-interventionists formed at Yale
FDR-voting Southerners were beating the drums for war whilst Yalies were forming America First!
PB:“Nativism” is another smear term, dating to the early 1850s and the Know-Nothing Party, which sought to halt immigration after millions of Irish flooded in after the famine of 1845. It carries a connotation of xenophobia, or the fear and hatred of foreigners.
Needless to say the "Know Nothings" - the original "nativists" -were mostly Northerners as well.
Maybe PB could also remind readers that it was in the South - particularly South Carolina and Georgia - that his run for the White House stalled after winning a New England state because he was too much of a protectionist for the New South.
Whether we're talking about neocon-loving Southerners glued to Fox News or Northern politicians voting for amnesty it seems to me there is plenty of blame to go around.
Dr. Wilson,
"What he believes is standard stuff for the coporate elite and “educated” Northeasterners."
Professor,
Can you recommend a University in America today for Southerners or Chronicle readers who still love the old country ? Thank you for any assistance you could give.
PS Are you teaching any classes in South Carolina ?
What Matra says (#24) is painfully true.
I have lived in the South my entire life; but, to paraphrase Dr. Fleming: I came to realize I don't really live in "the South." What I know about the South I read in books.
It was Southerners and Southern descendants in the West who elected and re-elected Bush. Just as long as you say “Jesus” a lot you can get a way with a lot with Southerners.
Yes, that is because of the context of the Union. He was the most electable national candidate who was willing to give lip service to the concerns of "traditionalists" or social conservatives.
It could always be worse. We could be like Canada, a bilingual state, which already has gay marriage, a human rights tribunal, and an official state policy of multiculturalism.
FDR-voting Southerners were beating the drums for war whilst Yalies were forming America First!
No, the war began when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and Hitler declared war on the United States. Few Americans desired to go to war for the sake of doing so. Of course it was Britain that started the war; Canada was embroiled in it for years before we were.
Needless to say the “Know Nothings” - the original “nativists” -were mostly Northerners as well.
That makes sense. European immigration was going almost exclusively to the Northeast and Midwest. It was their communities which were being inudated with immigrants.
Maybe PB could also remind readers that it was in the South - particularly South Carolina and Georgia - that his run for the White House stalled after winning a New England state because he was too much of a protectionist for the New South.
Protectionism hasn't always been good for us. From 1865 to 1945, the agricultural South was looted to prop up American/Northern industrial interests.
Whether we’re talking about neocon-loving Southerners glued to Fox News or Northern politicians voting for amnesty it seems to me there is plenty of blame to go around.
The South voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1957, Civil Rights Act of 1960, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Immigration Act of 1965, the IRCA amnesty of 1984, and the Immigration Act of 1990. It was mostly Southerners who thwarted the most recent amnesty bill(s). Guess who opposed the Reconstruction amedments and the federal civil rights acts of that era.
As Yancey pointed pointed out, and Dr. Wilson has reminded us over the years, the North is always coming up with ever new "wild" and "insane" notions which they then go about forcing on the rest of the country. This has been going on since the earliest days of the Union. Unfortunately, most of these ideas have trickled down and taken root here over the years, but almost all of them are imports.
Secession would be a great idea. Personally, I think it is too late for that. Decades of media brainwashing and suburbanization has eroded the remnants of the traditional Southern way of life. It's still a noble thought.
Pqt Buchanan never mentions LEGAL IMMIGRATION. LEGAL IMMIGRATION is major causal factor in the racial and economic dispossession of Native Born White Americans.
His most recent book is a boring rehash. He never mentions role post-1965 Asian "Americans in the racial and economic dispossession of Native Born White Americans.
I'm very glad that America destroyed Japan in WW11. Japan wouls have invaded and conquered Australi-Australi was atacked and invaded by Japan-an New Zealand. If Japan had conquered Australia and New Zealand, the White Men of these nations would have been enslaved and tortured to death. The White Women of Australia and New Zealand would have made into sex slaves for the troops of the imperial army.
Pat Bucahanan still thinks it was a good idea to destroy Vietnam even though Vietnam did not pose a threat to America. Cuba and Nicaragua were threats to America either. Despite this billions were spent detroying these nations. Many innocents died. Lots of blood dripping from Pat's Hands.
#24. True, Southerners voted for Bush as the seeming lesser evil. But it was not Southerners who gave the country no choice except between two evils. And a lot of you folks complaining about Bush, including Mr. Buchanan, supported him in two elections. Southerners were not really eager to get into WW II. They just wanted to make sure we were ready for it.
Mr. Reavis, #25. Unfortunately, the answer to all your questions is No.
Should read:Neither Fidel's Cuba nor Sandinista Nicaragua were a threat to America's existence.
Prozium,
fantastic response!
Horace Grady,
regarding Japan, I hadn't heard that said before. Well, judging by the Aussies' suicidal policies today they would prefer to be a dead nation.
Maybe Buchanan will recant on his deathbed since those wars would appear wrong from his world view.
Dr. Wilson,
As you know, Buchanan supported Bush only as the lesser of two evils. At the time of supporting Bush he was even criticising him.
Though I thought Kerry was the lesser evil, voting lesser of two evils seems prudent in swing states. I voted third party because I'm in a Republican bastion.
George W. Bush worst president ever.
Great blog, Fade.
roger @4:
The United States was never supposed to be a democracy. When discussing democracy, each of our Founding Fathers spoke disdainful words about it, except for Jefferson during the French Revolution. They denounced it as a type of government which stripped citizens of the rights which they thought were permanently theirs, all because the passionate feelings of the moment spurred the majority of the people to overturn a law and replace it with a new one. The U.S. was built as a republic, a government which protects all the rights and privileges which the people declare in advance to be non-negotiable. That republic was replaced by an empire 147 years ago. Although some of democracy's aspects and characteristics (like voting for congressmen and leaders of the executive branch like the president) are good tools to use when forming the leadership of a republican government, democracy in its pure form is not something to look highly upon.
I feel cheated. I was robbed of the American Dream...If such a thing ever truly existed...
I want the 1940's and 1950's back...Or maybe the 1920's...(some would say we have relived the 1920's economic policies...) I do like the idea of the 'flapper'...
As a side-note, does anyone else think it is a crazy idea to put greenspan in charge, once again, of the economy? hillary is nearly as stupid as bush....
Democracy is a great idea when practiced among educated equals.... However, if the Hellenes and the Romans could not make it work properly and for a sustained period...What business does America have practicing democracy...This country's citizens can barely read and perform basic mathematics...
I have a better plan...
Remove all the non-whites from America...Then, of the remaining whites, sterilize all those compromised by the jewing of American culture...Subsequently, impose a constitutional monarchy...E.g. the Spartan constitution....A dual monarchy, with an assembly of elders...(not paid of course...civic service is its own reward).........Institute a military service requirement of male citizens...Don't fight unnecessary wars... Add some lemon zest and season to taste...
A recipe for good government...
Oh! And by the way...
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
@30: "True, Southerners voted for Bush as the seeming lesser evil. But it was not Southerners who gave the country no choice except between two evils. And a lot of you folks complaining about Bush, including Mr. Buchanan, supported him in two elections. Southerners were not really eager to get into WW II. They just wanted to make sure we were ready for it."
At one time I fantasised that there was still such a thing as wholesome ethnic European enclaves in the North, probably due to second- and third-generationers still swearing in Italian on the streets of my home city of Rochester, New York. On some level there are, though they are still waning as fast as ever and I imagine with my generation they will be lost entirely once and for all.
Dr. Wilson, I count several of the youth of old-stock Southerners among my friends, and I can attest that support for Bush is enthusiastic, grassroots and widespread. If you have yourself managed to avoid such company, I hope you thank the Lord every day for your friends and family, because I find I can hardly go anywhere in America without hearing someone worship Bush, Clinton or Obama.
Does it really matter whether Southerners produced the inept and corrupt regime tyrannising us all? I just get the impression that they have been too successfully conquered and colonised, rendered incapable of proposing a formidable decent alternative to the mass destruction. I'm basing this impression off of the Huckabee debacle.
The United States were not meant to be a democracy or a republic. They were meant to be a federal union of republics. Actually, they were not even "meant" to be. That is what they naturally were. If you are going to talk about the origins of the U.S. then the first requirement is to get this part right. Understand that the Republican nationalists did the first and greatest destructive act by perverting the federal government from a limited collaboration of states into a centralised government with no limits upon its power. If you dwell on the republic degenerating into a democracy you are missing the main point.
"Understand that the Republican nationalists did the first and greatest destructive act by perverting the federal government from a limited collaboration of states into a centralised government with no limits upon its power."
It does indeed have a limit on its power: it is completely helpless to do [almost] anything of value for civilisation or for the people it rules.
(Governments can and have done good. Ours just doesn't seem to be able to.)
@ 37
"Flavius Claudius Julianus
Oh! And by the way…
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ"
Since you are such a brave Superman, why don't you use your real name?
I don't so much mind the lack of a name.
I could, however, do without the vaguely homoerotic fetish for statism, Spartan militarism, and neopaganism.
http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/lively.html
OK, everybody. Let's take a vote.
Snails, or oysters?
After all -- as Pastor Rutowicz can no doubt attest -- there is a traditional religious term for someone fixated on sameness (homo) to the point of pathological antipathy toward "the Other": Sodomite.
I'm sure we all know other expressions.
Perhaps the correct pronunciation would be "Claudiuth Flaviuth Julianuth."
I wouldn't care so much about the name thing either except this man makes so much of bravery and honor and manliness, he has contempt for the weak, and wants to "sterilize all those compromised by the jewing of American culture" [read Christians], I'd expect him to live up to some of his professed virtues.
C'mon, fellas, leave the poor bloke alone. The best way to discredit leftists, atheists and Nazis is to let them open their mouths.
@ G.S.
Your analysis of such behavior is not without merit. When I'm confronted with such racial strutting, I always wonder if there might not be something in one's genealogy one is trying to deflect attention from.
"...makes so much of bravery and honor and manliness..."
Ooh, ooh! Did thomebody thay *manlineth*!
Count me in!!
Clyde Wilson @40:
If you were referring to my post in an attempt to correct the assertions I made, I thank you. The creation of the federal government and drafting of the Constitution in 1787 merely made official what had already naturally come about. No "intent" or "meaning" concerning our type of government was simply contrived out of thin air in Philadelphia in September of '87. I also applaud your grammatically correct statement "The United States WERE . . ."
Clyde as always you make the central point in your post #40 above. Mankind's tendency it seems to me a youthful or a naive tendency is inclinced toward moving BOGUSLY toware the One.
Actually the one is the glue which permits differentiation. We can never understand Being completely i.e. peek into it [spy] or turn up and look under a corner of the rug of the universe since we are a part of it and not separate. However it is a desire of mankinds and a childish one to believe we can know being which as a whole is one and thus we tend to bogusly move toward that which we ingorantly perceive the one to be. Funny, too, [sadly?]
Somewhere along the way I read (and i'm not sure if it's Yeats, i could google it later) as a commentary of where we are in TIME today:
"We are too late for the gods
and too early for Being.
Being's poem, just begun, is man."
I used to say on the old sf site my only optimism with regard to mankind is in how young we are. As for the case specific: - Bush - everyone on the old sf site to a man predicted [spookily enough possums] in detail exactly what the W. Bush years would be to a "T" while he was President including Iraq & prior to his election. We knew the neo-cons. ... Interestingly enough it was the neo-cons Wolfowitz, Feif, Pearle A.I.P.A.C. and their boys Rummy & Cheney who gave Bremmer his marching orders for de-Bathification of Iraq and the dismantling of Iraq's army, with doh-doh (Bush) in tow? ... I wonder if W. was consciously playing along. Or with just a little more spine to stand up to them utilizing Powell & Rice rather than bending over for the rest of the bad guys, our boys/soldiers in Iraq would have been home shortly after the "Mission Accomplished" speech, and Bush might have succeeded. Otherwise if W. knew the score he then consciously went along tongue-in-cheek, when he could pry it down from the roof of his mouth.
Because as we had explained Iraq's and America's success on a bicycle built-for-two wasn't the Other gameplan for Iraq, the neo-con gameplan which we also exposed on the old sf site. ... If we mattered in the politics of this country (if there really was differentiation) and our efforts and discourse altered the course, I suppose we'd get the Nobel Prize for Peace? Because that other sort of chicanery or behind the scenes perfidy in government via foreign influence is also Evil. ... But they HAVE the MEDIA here, and so now of course as expected and predicted by us 8 years ago their 'out' is it is/was ALL "Bush's War". That's hutzpa but crosses the line into EVIL. I wondered out loud back then if W. would take the fall and go to jail, and if so would the neo-cons at least bring him chocolates? (Humor) ... the reply was no of course not but history down the road, if written at all honestly, would have to record him as having been a total jerk. Wow. Like I said my only optimism resides in how young mankind apparently is.
In the meantime a toast to W. & to his chemins qui ne menent nulle part. At least he's still got those 'isms' that bedevil him wrapped up. Funny.