Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: What makes Pat run?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    1,928


    I saw a friend had the current (1/06) issue of Pat Buchanan's American Conservative magazine and eagerly swapped it for two back issues of TNT, commenting "I remember that magazine when it was a newsletter" -- stretching the truth slightly in Buchanan's favor since I was referring to his wonderful newsletter from the early Duke era (early 90s). It was called"Patrick J. Buchanan -- From the Right" or PJB-FTR. Anybody remember it?


    Boy, did I get a wrong number. This mag is a cross between National Review (design and layout) and Human Events (tepid, noncommital content). Much of the issue is devoted to the war,Bush's political fate etc. True, there's an article from page 60 on about Alan Dershowitz's fight against Norman Finkelstein's latest book decrying Holocaust exploitation, and while Finkelstein has courageously drawn much rage from the Hollowcaust lobbyfor ithe's hardly a hero of the revisionist right. A movie about Geishas and a book about Beethoven are reviewed -- the last taking up the 4th and 5th pages from the end and being the ONLY item in the whole mag that has anything like a pulse.


    I hate to say it but this is one right-of-center periodical I'm not going torecirculate. I've torn out the Beethovensheet and am throwing the rest out.Something strange is going on-- it's almost as if the rightist hero we knew in PJB never existed and we're back to thebeltway nonentity he was in the Nixon/Reagan years. The NaTimes has several times zeroed in onPJB as a hero manqué (or as a heading* currently at ANU.ORG puts it, a "lovable loser").


    I don't want this fate for PJB -- or us. Well, he's written some great columns in recent years, maybe the "picture will come back on the screen" again and stay awhile.


    I'mopen to any and all theories as to whyBuchanan acts this way. Frankly I've always found his big-mouthed sister a bit much. Why is it I can't shake the feeling that they're both simply playing parts scripted and funded by people who have nothing to do with our agenda?


    * forPJB's article "How Bush turned it around"


    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48003Edited by: nelson

  2. #2
    Guest
    Howdy Nelson! Great Post !
    Ah, Pat Buchanan. Yes, he has indeed cashed in his relevancy chips. After picking a leftwing negress as a presidential"running mate" and going soft in general, Pat is now becomePat-hos (pathos!)
    Many years ago in my misspent youth, I attended a Washington DC political social event: The wedding receptionof Paul Weyrich's daughter at a fancy DC political hotel. Mr. Weyrich at the time was pushing a television station called "National Empowerment Television", or NET. In my misspent youth, I thought such endeavors were worthwhile. Anything "conservative" must be the opposite of "Leftist" or "Clinton", right? Fortunately I've had some years to extract head from butt and think white and right. But NET looked promising. It was anti-Clinton, had an energetic advertising machine, some inspired people running it, and a studio next to Union Station.
    But this wedding: My real purpose was to encounter Pat Buchanan in the flesh. I supposed thathe would be going, what in a wedding potentially containing two of thepremier Catholic Conservative pundits in US of A. I was most disappointed when Pat was nowhere to be found. It was only years later that I read that Mssrs. Weyrich and Buchanan were perhaps not the greatest of pals. And at the time (~1996) these two fellows were in competition for the primacy of the "anti-Clinton" forces in DC. So no Pat -- just a bunch of conservative pundit weenies, and some wimpy "Catholic" "conservatives" in love with Vatican-II. Fortunately there were some rowdies from Paul's daughter's college who were the life of the party.
    Alas, the Buchanan television phenomenon continued (he stayed on "Crossfire" for many years) while Mr. Weyrich's endeavor NET fell apart after a few years. During my middlelife with "The Resister", I had my position criticized and reoriented that Mr. Weyrich was no friend of any White-ist group or Nationalist sentiment.
    The silver lining? Paul W's drop-dead gorgeous daughter married an excellent young fellow with a USAF commission, and nowhave sons and a happy, traditional marriage. Now that's a good thing! Gosh, a happy ending in Washington!
    "The American Conservative" At anewsstand near you!
    Merry Christmas, Nelson!
    Edited by: Realgeorge

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    1,928


    You're a laff riot, George -- and every word sheerly delectable! Hahaha, we've all learned a lot along the yellow brick road of reality,haven't we. Say, were you connected with The Resister in some way other than subscriber? A fascinating publication........ I heard about it for years, was dying to see a copy, and then when I finally did it went wildly beyond my expectations (I expected healthy patriotism, it delivered shoot-em-up opposition to Jewish supremacism). I was stunned and delighted...... and then learned it had ceased publication. Mr. Barry seems to have abandoned the fight and I can't stand it.


    I had suspected Weyrich of uselessness or neocon malfeasance but discovered him 8 or 10 years ago as pretty real-world after all in some ways.


    L'chaim, all!

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    564


    Upon reading Pat Buchanan's latest on "How Bush turned it around," I was flabbergasted to read his reference to the latest Iraqi election as a kind of victory for GWB. Just about every other commentary I've seen regards the outcome as a victory for the Islamist group, and the big winner as Iran.


    Pat had better stop smoking those strong cigars!
    The greatest threat to freedom is not foreign governments. It is our own.

  5. #5
    Guest
    Paul W. has at least one excellent friend
    [Hi Wolfram! Thanks for the reply and your excellent analysis.]


    The Free Congress Foudation had or has in its employ one very good patriot, William S. Lind, who appears from time to time in ANU articles. Dr. Lind scorches the scholarly-liberal bunch with revisionist historical flame of high order. He is sufficiently rightist and pro-white that he fits right in with us radicals. FCF's inevitable NWO plants and Republicans seemingly haven't got to him yet. Lind's writings are on a whole different plane from any "conservative" from the mainstream.


    And yes, some of Paul Weyrich's writings from the early 1990s were right on the mark. He was the first writer I remember to call for NATOs elimination, just weeks after Boris Yeltsin was deposed and the Soviet Union dissolved. He also predicted and bemoaned America's elevation of a new enemy -- any enemy -- just to get the Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace machine on track again. He was a most prophetic dude.


    It was too bad that NET contained mostly waffly neo-cons of the Jack Kemp variety. It was truly exciting to see, even for a few months, a news TV station that was so obviously not part of the MSM. I would bet that Mr. Weyrich is most bitter for NETs lack of acceptance. But perhaps is was better to have it fold rather than its being dictated to by New World Order forces in DC just a few blocks away. Paul was openly critical of the Fed Reserve and international banking in general, a no-no if U want to curry favor with Republican strongmen
    Feliz Navidad, Amigos!Edited by: Realgeorge

  6. #6
    Guest


    Free Congress Foundation ... A False Flag from NWO


    Sgt Skull comments correctly that the FCF is part and parcel of the New World Order [see his comments under "The Iraq War" in this discussion forum]. He and I like William Lind and his commentaries about the military. But we take the grain of salt, noting that the employer, FCF, is the mother of "National Empowerment Television" and definitively NOT Nationalist or in opposition to the NWO powers-that-be


    My personal encounters with FCF were tell-tale: I felt uncomfortable with them, and they with me, cause I was a real veteran with real in-the-field experience, while FCF was in military-arm-chair-quarterback mode, and greatly in love with Bob Dole's candidacy (uggh!)

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    1,928


    Priceless, RG........ I appreciate all y'all's wit immensely. Re "empowerment," it is one of those totally fetid liberal buzzterms our kind would do well to tag as hopelessly patronizing and cant-ridden.* If your reflexes are working properly, the wordshould instantly conjure up the image of New Gingrich giving a feverish speech about what the "new" Republicanoid Congress of 1994 is going to do for you.


    One thing for sure -- wherever "empowerment" is being discussed in politics nowadays, politicians are planning for more generous "programs" for the supposedly downtrodden..........to be paid for by YOU!


    Dear me, I hope I don't sound too CYNICAL. [img]smileys/smiley4.gif[/img]


    ---------------------------------------------


    * cant -- aha, another essential buzzword for the compleat nationalist muckraker today!


    http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cant



  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,890

    I guess one could say that having stunned the world by speaking up for John Demjanjuk 20 years ago -- an act of Holohoax revisionism, if only by implication -- PJB has never chosen to buck the gews that directly again. I don't entirely hold it against him -- if you want to keep raising bedrock issues at the top of the profession you play by certain rules.

    What I do blame him for is when he suddenly takes the non-nationalist position. For this no rationale or defense sugfgests itself. The "good" PJB is still immensely useful, I just wish the other one would get lost.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •