Distant Drums at Sarah’s Party
ST. PAUL, Minn.—The American Right has just died and gone to heaven.
Wednesday night's convention address by Sarah Palin here in St. Paul has confirmed the bold decision of John McCain to choose the Alaska governor as his co-pilot and united the Republican Party as it has not been since the second term of Ronald Reagan.
A wild enthusiasm for Sarah Palin has brought conservatives home to John McCain, and GOP leaders of all hues—from Fred Thompson to Mitt Romney to Mike Huckabee to Rudy Giuliani—to the rostrum to lacerate the liberal media for their five days of feral assaults on Sister Sarah.
The war the right lives for, against the people the right truly loathes—the liberal media elite who savagely "Bork" every true conservative who gets on the path to national power—has been reignited.
Positive polarization has been achieved. The Republican Party has been united and invigorated. The enthusiasm gap with the Democratic ticket has been closed. And the issues upon which the base loves to fight—the Culture War and Right to Life—are back on the table.
Palin's beautifully crafted and delivered acceptance speech, after Rudy's gleeful excoriations of the pretensions of Obama, will rank as a night to remember in convention history.
Yet, as the familiar battle lines form up for the delicious eight-week war that lies ahead, one hears a distant thunder. And the seriousness of the hour we are in comes home.
U.S. troops have crossed into Pakistan to attack Taliban and al-Qaida units in the privileged sanctuary of the tribal areas just across the border from Afghanistan. Have we just thrown a rock into the biggest hornet's nest on earth?
How will the Pakistani government and people react to this U.S. incursion into their country to fight a war their own army has been reluctant to wage? How will the tribal peoples react? Will the weak new democratic regime, united only in its hatred of deposed President Musharraf, fall?
What is the future of this Islamic nation of 170 million, with its five-dozen nuclear weapons, that was once America's great ally in South Asia, but is now seething with anti-Americanism?
In Afghanistan, the Taliban move closer to the capital Kabul as hardly a day goes by without U.S. armed forces being charged with the accidental killing of Afghan women and children. Is this even a winnable war, after seven years of fighting? And, if so, at what cost?
While the convention hears claims of victory in Iraq and an early return of U.S. troops, there are reports the Nouri al-Maliki regime, in collusion with Iran, wants the Americans out to settle accounts with the U.S.-sponsored Sunni militias and the Kurds over who rules in Baghdad and Kirkut.
Is the end of America's long and costly war in Mesopotamia to be an Iraq incorporated into a Shia crescent led by Tehran?
Arnaud de Borchgrave reports that Israel, having supplied Mikheil Saakashvili's army with weapons and training prior to his invasion of South Ossetia, had hoped to use Georgian airfields to fly strikes against Iran. The Russians are said to be furious and considering new military aid to Syria.
Now one reads of Dutch intelligence agents, who had infiltrated Iran's nuclear program to sabotage it, being withdrawn, as the Dutch believe a U.S. strike on Iran may be imminent.
Vice President Cheney is in Tbilisi promising $1 billion in new aid, as Prime Minister Putin of Russia is asking why, if this aid is humanitarian, it is being brought into the Black Sea in U.S. warships.
In Moscow, President Medvedev and his foreign minister are talking of a Russian sphere of influence like the one the United States has demanded for two centuries with its Monroe Doctrine—a sphere from which all foreign military blocs and foreign troops are to be excluded.
This is a direct challenge to administration and neocon plans to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. John McCain may declare, "We are all Georgians now!"—but, are Americans, or Europeans, truly willing to go to war with a nuclear-armed Russia to keep Joseph Stalin's birthplace under a regime led by an erratic hothead who launched what may be the dumbest war in history, which he lost within 24 hours?
In June of 1914, a powerful flotilla of the Royal Navy was anchored in the German port of Kiel on a friendly visit where British naval officers visited German warships on the invitation of Adm. Von Tirpitz, and the Kaiser himself inspected the great new British battleship George V, in the uniform of a British admiral.
The festive occasion was interrupted and ended by news of the assassination of the Austrian Archduke Francis Ferdinand in Sarajevo in the Balkans, where neither British nor Germans had vital interests.
Six weeks later, the two nations had plunged into the bloodiest war in history. Today, as Republicans celebrate the last hours of a hugely successful convention, and Democrats seethe at the hiding they took, are we as a nation drifting inexorably for new confrontations and larger and wider wars?
Who is minding the store, as we party in St. Paul?
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
Entries(RSS)
A Monroe Doctrine for Russia makes sense. Its their part of the world, and we have no right to interfere with Russia's relations with its former Republics.
I simply cannot fathom why Buchanan refers to the Republicans as
'we', after all the abuse the party has given him; including GirlySue's
handlers running her away from any prior link to Buchanan's Presidental runs. That is when her handlers aren't putting a leash and knee pads on her and trotting her over to do stupid tricks at AIPAC.It's really getting sad.
Palin is a liar and a fraud, like any hack who's selected for the top of the Demopublican/Republicrat heap, and her narcissism and cultural
Marxism make Hillary look like Betsy Ross. She's an incompetent mother as well, with her two oldest a Hessian and the town slattern.
I would suggest that the Turks, the Iranians and the Shiites of Iraq, although they have their bones to pick with one another, might well find common cause against the Kurds - our "allies."
I also agree with Mr. Buchanan that the Maliki government is showing signs that it wants us out and is positioning itself to deal with the Sunnis - once our foes now our "allies."
The Russians are indeed positioned to turn Syria and check our alleged gains in Iraq and to fester the Syrian thorn in the side of Israel, and we and the EU in the guise of NATO have unnecessarily antagonized Russia, placing it on the defensive, which means that it must go on the offensive to protect its real and perceived interests.
The Islamic bomb already exists - in Pakistan! We have successfully, step by step, destabilized the country: by invading Afghanistan, we made the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, who had managed to tolerate one another, just barely, into our common foe and placed them into the most unstable region of Pakistan from which they can continue the war in Afghanistan and destabilize Pakistan; with our meddling, we have destabilized an already unstable Pakistani government.
It seems that "those people" in Washington along with their Israeli allies are determined to ignite a war with Iran. By their arrogant fumbling around in the Caucasus, they might also ignite a war there as well.
Meanwhile, the GOP has nominated a man who by his words would seem to be the reincarnation of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Wilson and Reagan. One might call him "The Kitchen Match," tumbling around in a space filled with gunpowder and gasoline vapors!
Unfortunately, I was distracted and neglected to mention Palin's actual accomplishment: she makes Dahack Odamnit look like Ozzie
Nelson.
I'll side with Raimondo on this one. A speech by a militarist from a Rapture worshipping church who put Shafly on the sidelines while prostrating herself to an even higher cult fronted by AIPAC. Since the MSM won't delve into Armageddon and its devotees perhaps the learned writers here could do us a favor.
Palin is, indeed, politically attractive...until you start looking at the details of her time in politics: Supporting the bridge to nowhere until she opposed it, sending a lobbyist to Washington to bring home tens of millions in pork to Wasilla, bringing home more pork to Alaska so that now Federal spend there is the highest per capita in the nation.
Moreover, with McCain's age and health problems, the probability that she'll succeed McCain in office goes way up. Not a pretty picture by any stretch of the imagination. If it comes to a war or serious diplomacy, can't the GOP do better than this Megan Mullaley look-alike?
Critical thinkers, even among the GOP, will soon realize that their empress, like their emporer, has no clothes.
Pepe Escobar reports:
Over two weeks ago, in an interview to Time magazine, Palin rambled on about "the situation we're in right now, at war, not knowing what the plan is to ever end the war, we're engaged in, understanding that Americans are seeking resolution in this war effort, so energy supplies being able to produce, and supply will be a big part of that ... the plan for the war, you know, let's make sure we have a plan here ..."
Or perhaps Iraq is a mission from God? That's what she said in June in Alaska, according to wasillaag.net: "Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right for this country. Our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God, that is what we have to make sure, there is a plan and that plan is God's plan."
Apparently - no, make it guaranteed - Sarah Palin is so terminally stupid that Americans might as well give up and surrender to evildoers right now. The fight is hopeless. The US is done.
"an incompetent mother" because her son is serving in the military? What kind of crap is that? People usually join the military because they want to protect our country against attack. A worthy objective, even if the neocons have abused the service and dedication of our troops by getting them sent to stupid empire projects. I think that is an insult to everyone who has honorably worn the uniform of our country and especially to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.
Not to mention that Track Palin is 19 years old, is an adult and no longer has an obligation to obey his parents even if they did object to his military service.
If a young girl succumbs to foolish passion for her steady boyfriend/fiancee and gets pregnant, how does that make her the "town slattern"? They are even getting married, though I hope they are not too young for a successful marriage.
Ronald and Nancy Reagan had Patty 6 months after their marriage. Is Nancy Reagan a "slattern?" Pat Robertson and his wife? Ditto.
I am here to tell you, as a mother of a teenager who got pregnant and thus the grandmother of the cutest grandchild in the world, that you can do pretty much all you can, take your kids to church (the Palins are Assembly of God, no wimpy liberal churches for them), try to oversee their associates and their comings and goings, and they can still screw up and disappoint you. There are plenty of churchgoing, Christian conservative parents who tried to watch and protect their kids and saw them still mess up and made the best of it. I can imagine you being one of those who would probably have been throwing rocks at the Woman Taken in Adultery in the Gospel of John.
Too bad you are anonymous on here. As a woman who takes pride in being in the Sarah Palin tough but feminine, rugged outdoorsy mold, I would like to kick your butt! I also think you should be glad that Sarah and Todd Palin don't know where you are either, because they could so totally kick your butt too! Calling people's kids names is the sort of thing that leads to people defending their family honor.
Maybe your kids, if such you have, are perfect model citizens and Christians and have never sinned or messed up. If so, thank God because it's not due to your parenting skills but sheer unmerited grace from God. If they haven't messed up yet, they will. Hopefully, they can come to you and say, I sinned, I messed up, what should I do now, and you will help them with that. Hopefully you won't call them names. If you have a child who wishes to serve our country in the armed forces, I hope you won't call them a Hessian. I've never been in the military but have family members who have served honorably, and they'd like to kick your butt too! Semper Fi!
Pat sums it up neatly.
The U.S. is engaged in a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. At the same time the neocons are trying to provoke a war with Iran, a war with nuclear-armed Pakistan and even a war with nuclear-armed Russia.
All this happens while the U.S. is broke. The war in Iraq alone will cost US $ 3 trillion, according to Nobelist Joseph Stiglitz.
I suppose that the neocons that control the U.S. administration have a plan. But what is this plan? From what is happening, the only plan I can imagine is to destroy America, start a nuclear war and destroy the world in a nuclear Holocaust.
So can anyone please tell me what is going on?
Ginny
You sure sound like a real "enemy-loving" Christian, with those "butt-kicking" impulses of yours.
Remember what Jesus said? "You shall not kick butt", that's what.
American Christians have a funny way with the Bible, picking and choosing the grossest stuff and completely ignoring "blessed are the peacemakers" and "do to others as you wish to be done to you" type of things. That's why America is so messed up, with the world's highest insanity rates.
BTW, if you don't like Internet anonimity, feel free to publish your personal data, including the adress. Your prayers may come true. There are more than few people that would like to see how really tough you are...
Buchanan doesn't seem to have gotten the memo that Palin dissed him.
Well, I acted more as a mom whose family has been insulted than a Christian. There is also such a concept as rash judgment which some people on here should acquaint themselves with, including me though I am a rather pacifistic soul until someone by insulting Palin's daughter and son, implicitly criticizes my daughter and my dad, uncle and nephew and all my friends who are in the military.
I am a woman, do you really think I would be so stupid as to publish my real name and address? That would really be stupid. I might be hotheaded when I feel my family has been attacked (it's my Irish getting up) but I'm not stupid!!!
Well, getting back to Sarah Palin--one thing that tells a lot about a person is the quality of his or her enemies. Seeing the feminist jackals tear into her and suddenly decide that women of her sort should stay home with their kids, seeing prochoice women spew venom at a woman who chose life, and seeing the cultured despisers of small town rural people who didn't go to Harvard and Yale, those who feel free to talk about rednecks, white trash, etc., that makes me feel like she is "one of us". This doesn't mean I am voting for McCain, I may though I was planning to write in Ron Paul.
We "crackers" "rednecks" or what have you, we should stick together and defend our own!!!
Part of being a redneck includes understanding the concept of "thems fightin words"!
@2 Pete
Your remarks are over the top, even Obama thinks Palin's children are off-limits.
My own son just left to join the army, and he should get out as a qualified helicopter mechanic/pilot and plans to settle in Alaska -- the new land of opportunity. He was smart enough to go to college, but could not face 4 years of regurgiataing political correctness to idiot professors in order to get a piece of paper that qualifies him to get a job in a cubicle doing "girly work." In no way does that make him a Hessian. I myself served in the US Navy for 4 years to get the GI Bill. Furthermore I still get together with my former shipmates.
As for accusing the daughter of being the town slattern, well don't we all wish we could get our dialogue from Family Guy? If my 17 year old daughter wants to get child-rearing out of the way early, then fine. It's a tough job that today's liberated women can barely contemplate let alone undertake. I hope Gov. Palin has 5 grandchildren by the young lady you so callously slagged off.
Shame on you!
@10 yar
I dispute your claim that America has the world's highest insanity rate. In Britain they recently discovered Prozac in fish as a result of so much being consumed that sewage treatment plants are not able to remove it.
Belarus, Sweden, Estonia, Finland all have higher suicide rates than the US. Drug abuse is higher than it should be but that incldes racial factors which throws the curve.
And Chinese mental hospitals are chock full of crazy dissidents.
As Gordon Liddy said, any gratuitous assertion can be just as gratuitously dismissed. Read a book!
Whining shrews,
Hessian. Mercenaries for empire and globalism. Warriors for Wal Mart. Doing nothing for the best interests of this nation and its' citizens. If telling yourself otherwise gets you through the day without suicide or rampage, go ahead and ride that unicorn but don't expect everyone else to indulge your nonsense. Those Americans whose military service was truly for this nation are nearly all in their graves, most from old age.
As regards the slattern, the Moosejaw decided to have a large family, which is a fine choice, but it simply requires a full time mother in the home. But no, Miz Sarry just had to go for a full time vocation outside the home, resulting in teen fornication and illegimate grandchildren-these people showed no interest in matrimony until the media glare enveloped them a whole week ago.
Not content with four children, GirlySue goes and has a fifth, at an age where medical fact shows that the odds of birth deformity rise lierally by the month as age increases. Finally, instead of rebuffing any offer for larger political office(much less give up her current employment)-because her family 'challenges' required her utmost attention, she eagerly jumps on the Al Z. Heimer express. This is narcissism greater than all the Yukon.
And the First Doofus-reminds one of Sean Penn as Spicoli-would probably be snapped in two by Michelle Obama's nagging, much less physical contact.
Pat Buchanan is an enigma. He is an intelligent, learned man. He knows his history. He knows the U.S. Constitution. He seems to care deeply about America and Western civilization. Ninety-nine percent of the time, he speaks the plain, unvarnished truth. And then, there's that other one percent of the time.
It's as reliable as clockwork. Until there's an election, Buchanan blasts both the people and policies who harm the United States, regardless of whether they're Republicans or Democrats. But come November, he always rejoins the Republican fold and supports the Republican candidate.
If Buchanan were a fool, I'd understand him. If he were an unprincipled party shill (like many people I knew when I worked on the Hill), I'd understand him.
But a smart, informed, principled man who always ends up supporting "the party" no matter what? That, I do not understand.
@ Scott
I don't think Pat Buchanan is being naive. I just think he recognizes the old right should not be burning all its bridges with the Republican Party. It brings me no pleasure to say so, but some day the folly of the neocons will lead to a foreign policy disaster that makes Iraq look like a picnic. At that point, neocon hubris and dispensationalist fantasies will start to lose their appeal. We ought to have some good men in the Republican Party, whether Pat Buchanan or Ron Paul, who will seize that opportunity to get the party and this nation back on the right track. What other option is there, besides prayer?
Etienne, I hope you are right, suspect you are wrong.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/06/AR2005060601651.html
Re: Buchanan
I don't pretend to know his feelings concerning Sarah Palin, but why is it so hard to remember that he is a journalist, i.e. he sometimes writes about things that happen whether he personally is in favor of them or not. I believe the things he wrote in the first part of his column are a good summary of what happened at the convention. This doesn't imply that I'm a Palin supporter.
Re: Pete
How nice to be able to see so clearly the evils that exist in the hearts of others.
"Palin’s beautifully crafted and delivered acceptance speech, after Rudy’s gleeful excoriations of the pretensions of Obama, will rank as a night to remember in convention history."
This is certainly true. Easily the most memorable convention night since that night in 1992 when Reagan and Pat both addressed the nation.
#17 - The problem with your scenario, Chesterbelloc, is that it assumes that after a neoconized, dispensationalized Republican party has led the US to catastrophe, the American people will nonetheless look to Republicans to get the nation "back on the right track". It's much more likely that they would look to the Democrats, assuming that the Demos are still around as the "other party". So it would make more sense to have good men in the Democratic party. Third and fourth parties should also be supported if for no other reason than to get some people thinking outside the two-party box. Yes, prayer is also a good option - indeed the best. Raising virtuous kids, strengthening local and small non-political institutions, etc. are also more important that maintaining an increasingly marginalized presence in the Republican party.
SKR (@19):
Type "Pat Buchanan" "Sarah Palin" into YouTube. He's not impartial.
Jack Benedict (@20):
I'm amazed that people who revere Reagan and Buchanan would compare the Rudy and Sarah show to the 1992 convention. That seems to me to be a slap to both men.
Three problems: the Dutch intelligence agents. Surely this story is a plant. Intelligence agencies don't announce their business in the press and do you really see some Dutch intelligence agent blabbing to a journalist in an Amsterdam coffee shop? This is just part of the on-going sabre-rattling over Iran. If there was really going to be an attack on Iran, the Dutch would have pulled their agents and said nothing. Is that not logical?
Georgia. That the Israeli screwballs who control Saakashvili might have envisaged using Georgia to get at Iran wouldn't surprise me. The problem would be that the planes would have to violate Azerbaijan's airspace to do so and I doubt if the Israeli government would go that far. Equally, to get in and out of Georgia, the planes would have to violate Turkey's airspace and their is also no reason to believe that official Israel would go that far.
1914: This is 2008, not 1914 and history does not repeat itself. Precisely because Europe marched off to war singing joyous songs in August 1914, it will never again do so. Any European government that gets involved in a war, from Iceland to Russia, knows that its own population will not support it. It is thus limited to what a non-conscript army can do in a short campaign and even then, outside Europe. That's why there is absolutely no talk of war in the European media. If Americans want a war, they will not be able to count on Europe, or use European territory. I would guess that official Washington knows that, which is probably why they backed down in Georgia.
@18 yar
You consider the Washington Post a reliable source? For shame!
Ms Meyer-Graham's zionist rag never puts America first, last would be better, but that's not always their option. They're still gloating that they hounded Nixon from office over 35 years ago. And anyone who questions Israel's right to billions of American tax dollars is declaring war on a group that buys ink by the tankerful.
Yar, you'd do well to parse that article. In a field of one nation America is the winner. The Author, one Mr. Weiss (guilty) says 25% nutty, and one fourth of that number possibly psychotic. The thrust of the article was that we as a nation are cheap. I guess it takes one to know one. The criminally insane are locked up at great expense to the law-abiding, and that counts as treatment. Everybody else can take Zoloft, Xanax and alcohol.
Scott Richert @23
I was impressed by the clever skewering of Obama by both of these. I thought Giuliani might make a good stand-up comic. I would certainly never have voted for him for president. As a Catholic I would never vote for a pro-abortion candidate (especially a "Catholic" one). As for Palin, I don't know that much about her yet, but am not happy to hear that she is an apostate.
I am glad, though, to see her stand up against that Marxist Obama and his powerful friends. Anyone in her position who can successfully put down the MSM in front of 40 million viewers has got my attention.
Etienne, you could admit to being wrong in many less words. Disparaging the source - without providing an alternative- is the lamest defence of one's ignorance. WaPo is often a total garbage(can't argue with that), but any paper that "puts America first' would be no better than the filthiest Commie or Nazi propaganda. So the fact that WaPo doesn't do it is actually something of an endorsement.
Is that what you are reading for your own enlightenment? "America first" stuff? That's your definition of "objective info"? Let me know, maybe I'll help you with your own Xanax polls, if have trouble affording them.
Although the roundtable called for a focus on the Palin candidacy, Buchanan's foray into a broader set of issues is to be commended. Probably everything that needs to be said about Palin's private life -- including her and her daughter's ovaries -- has been said.
Certainly larger issues are at stake and, like it or not, the next president will be dealing with other issues not really related to Palin's family problems. And I would add, the next president will nominate probably two Supreme Court Justices, and I'm reasonably sure that the people on Chronicles will not like Obama's appointees. Moreover, Obama's spiritual advisor---God-Damn-America Wright probably knows more about Obama's real intentions for the United States than most voters of either party. So in light of these realities Buchanan is wise to identify with the GOP.
Bush is wrong to expand the Iraq adventure which has already solidified Jihad against us Infidels. But using Kant's measure for blame, I would say Bush willed good but did not produce just good things with the invasion of Iraq. I think McCain-- with whatever warts or other imperfections he may have---is the only reasonable choice at this time. He, better than most people, knows first-hand the horrors of war and will be wiser in dealing with our real enemy (not terror but the unremorseful perpetrators of heinous acts against people---civilians, women and children.). The differences we have with Russia pale by comparison with the differences we have with the real enemy. The tools against our major enemy cannot be fought even largely with our military. It will be a long struggle that must begin with an accurate assessment of what we face and a new strategy for saving ourselves.
Kirt-
If powerless neocon twerps were able to take over the Republican Party without a shot, what's to stop us from taking it back for ourselves? I don't dismiss Democrats like Bob Conley or third-party candidates like Bob Barr, but I think Buchanan, Ron Paul, etc. are on to something by staying with the Republicans. We should never endorse the nuts, but let's mess up the works until the party can't win without us! Call it an insurgency.
I don't think Palin could be called an apostate, though her parents could. They left the Catholic Church for AoG when she was a small child. This unfortunately often happens when Catholics move to someplace where the Church is thin on the ground (Alaska would certainly fit that descrption) and the independent churches and the pentecostal and evangelical churches are right there, are fully staffed and are exciting. Poorly catechised Catholics will fall for this. Southwest Virginia, for example, has a number of people with Polish and Italian names, but they aren't Catholic. Their ancestors were, they came down there to work the coal mines, there were no priests or few and far between, little mission churches sharing a priest, miles and miles apart, and they lost the faith.
There's a group on a Catholic blog which is praying for the return of Mrs. Palin to the Faith. Well, why not, it worked for Clarence Thomas! I will join in their intentions.
I have been intending to write in Ron Paul for prez. Kearney Smith, you raise some excellent points. Obama sounds good when he speaks but some of his associates....well! And his abortion views are what give me pause considering some of the Justices on the Supreme Court are pretty old. Not that just putting the right Justices up there is going to get rid of abortion and some of the Reagan-Bush I Justices have been a sore disappointment. But Obama justices are bound to be and also there's a lot of other mischief they can do with other Constitutional questions. So I fear a vote for 3rd Party or write in when I used to be a pretty reliable Republican vote, is the same as a vote for Obama. I guess it depends on how your state is going. If you live in a reliably blue state, write in anyone you wish as a protest. If it's reliably red, same thing. If it's close and in play like the state I live in, better think twice, which the husband and I are doing. And pray for guidance. Funny how we always think of that last!
@27 yar
Considering that the article you refer to dates to 2005, there should be studies that have come in from other countries, but alas, not so.
As for WaPo being a zionist rag that denigrates its host nation, I'll stand pet thank you very much. Anyone who seeks "enlightenment" from fish wrappers -- or even TV for that matter -- needs to be on Xanax or possibly Thorazine.
And accusing me of both ignorance and insanity is sophomoric on your part in that you've cast the first epithet.
The neocons are anything but powerless, Chesterbelloc; they're well funded and well connected. As far as us taking over the Republican party is concerned, you'll have to decide which argument you're making - will we take over because they "can't win without us" or because they've led the country "to a foreign policy disaster that makes Iraq look like a picnic." In the former case, this would be a great year to prove that they can't win without us, but instead "conservatives", including many "paleos" are swarming aboard the McCain/Palin bandwagon because they can't stand Obama. In the latter case, we might indeed be able to take over the Republican party following such a foreign policy disaster, but it would not be worth having.
Well I certainly agree that voting for McCain is against our long-term interests. I'm just saying that we shouldn't burn bridges when we don't know what the future holds.
"a smart, informed, principled man who always ends up supporting “the party” no matter what? That, I do not understand."
I know what you mean, but in fairness to Mr. Buchanan, I do recall at least one election where he didn't back the GOP ie., 2000. He may even have spoiled the election for Bush/Cheney in as many as four states ie., Wisconsin, Iowa, New Mexico, and Oregon. Never-the-less, I think he made the right choice in 2000 (albeit probably four years later than he should have), and should have stuck with that choice by endorsing Michael Peroutka in 2004, and Chuck Baldwin this year, alas. Nobody's perfect, but Pat does deserve some credit for having resisted GOP mania, albeit not as much as he should have done.
Oh, and apparently some you people didn't get the memo about the U.S. military: Sometime shortly after St. Patrick's Day of 2003, there ceased to be any rational basis for a morally upstanding and patriotic American to have anything to do with that factory of globalist tyranny, war criminality and treason. There are, never-the-less, many good men & women in the U.S. military, yet until it stops acting as Redcoats on behalf of the international petroleum industry and the Likud Party, and engaging in the systematic torture, sexual abuse, rape, and even outright murder of generally innocent prisoners often taken in random street sweeps, all such good men & women associated with the U.S. military should end their involvement with it ASAP. I'd like to be able to revere the U.S. military, but it has become something that I am forced to loathe.
"the Israeli screwballs who control Saakashvili might have envisaged using Georgia to get at Iran wouldn’t surprise me. The problem would be that the planes would have to violate Azerbaijan’s airspace to do so and I doubt if the Israeli government would go that far."
They wouldn't need to violate Azerbaijani airspace; Armenian airspace would be adequate to the task of bombing Iran from Georgia. And as I understand it, Russia is thought to be siding with Azerbaijan in the soon-to-be Second War for Nagorno-Karabahk, hence an Armenian decision to join Georgia within the Anglo-American-Zionist Axis doesn't seem all that far-fetched (although perhaps won't occur now, in light of events in South Ossetia and Abkhazia).