International News
See other International News Articles
Title: Buchanan To WSJ: It Wasn’t Patriots Who Led GOP, America To Disaster–It Was You!
Source:
VDare
URL Source: http://www.vdare.com/articles/bucha ... america-to-disaster-it-was-you
Published: May 19, 2015
Author: Pat Buchanan
Post Date: 2015-05-19 10:55:54 by nativist nationalist
Keywords: None
Views: 6754
Comments: 48
As Middle America rises in rage against “fast track” and the mammoth Obamatrade deal known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Wall Street Journal has located the source of the malady. Last Monday’s lead editorial began: “Here we go again. In the 1990s Pat Buchanan launched a civil war within the Republican Party on a platform targeting immigration and trade. Some claimed Pitchfork Pat was the future of the GOP, though in the end he mainly contributed to its presidential defeats.” But, woe is us, “the GOP’s Buchanan wing is making a comeback.” Now it is true that, while Nixon and Reagan won 49-state landslides and gave the GOP five victories in six presidential contests, the party has fallen upon hard times. Only once since 1988 has a Republican presidential nominee won the popular vote. But was this caused by following this writer’s counsel? Or by the GOP listening to the deceptions of its Davos–Doha–WSJ wing? In the 1990s, this writer and allies in both parties fought NAFTA, GATT and MFN for China. The WSJ and GOP establishment ran with Bill and Hillary and globalization. And the fruits of their victory? Between 2000 and 2010, 55,000 U.S. factories closed and 5 million to 6 million manufacturing jobs disappeared. Columnist Terry Jeffrey writes that, since 1979, the year of maximum U.S. manufacturing employment, “The number of jobs in manufacturing has declined by 7,231,000—or 37 percent.” Does the Journal regard this gutting of the greatest industrial base the world had ever seen, which gave America an independence no republic had ever known, an acceptable price of its New World Order? Beginning in 1991, traveling the country and visiting plant after plant that was shutting down or moving to Asia or Mexico, some of us warned that this economic treason against America’s workers would bring about political retribution. And so it came to pass. Since 1988, a free-trade Republican Party has not once won Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois or Wisconsin in a presidential election. Ohio, the other great Midwest industrial state, is tipping. The Reagan Democrats are gone. Who cast them aside? You or us? Since the early 1990s, we have run $3 billion to $4 billion in trade deficits with China. Last year’s was $325 billion, or twice China’s defense budget. Are not all those factories, jobs, investment capital and consumer dollars pouring into China a reason why Beijing has been able to build mighty air and naval fleets, claim sovereignty over the South and East China seas, fortify reefs 1,000 miles south of Hainan Island, and tell the U.S. Navy to back off? The WSJ accuses us of being anti-growth. But as trade surpluses add to a nation’s GDP, trade deficits subtract from it. Does the WSJ think our $11 trillion in trade deficits since 1992 represents a pro-growth policy? On immigration, this writer did campaign on securing the border in 1991-92, when there were 3 million illegal immigrants in the United States. But the Bush Republicans refused to seal the border. Now there are 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants and the issue is tearing the party apart. Now everybody is for “secure borders.” We did urge a “moratorium” on legal immigration, such as America had from 1924 to 1965, to assimilate and Americanize the millions who had come. The WSJ Republicans called that xenophobia. Since then, tens of millions of immigrants, here legally and illegally, mostly from the Third World, have arrived. Economically, they consume more in tax dollars than they contribute. Politically, most belong to ethnic groups that vote between 70 and 90 percent Democratic. Their children will bury the GOP. Consider California, which voted for Nixon all five times he was on a national ticket and for Reagan in landslides all four times he ran. Since 1988, California has not gone Republican in a single presidential election. No Republican holds statewide office. Both U.S. Senators are Democrats. Democrats have 39 of 53 U.S. House seats. Republican state legislators are outnumbered 2-to-1. Americans of European descent, who provide the GOP with 90 percent of its presidential vote, are down to 63 percent of the nation and falling. By 2042, they will be a minority. And there goes the GOP. Lest we forget, the “Buchanan wing” also opposed the invasion of Iraq while the WSJ-War Party wing howled, “Onto Baghdad!” “Unpatriotic Conservatives,” we were called in a cover story by a neocon National Review for saying the war was unnecessary and unwise. Now, a dozen years after the “cakewalk” war, GOP candidates like Marco Rubio and Bush III are trying to figure out what it was all about, Alfie, and what they would have done, had they only known. Our agenda in that decade was—stay out of wars that are not our business, economic patriotism, secure borders, and America first. The foreign debt and de-industrialization of America, the trillion-dollar wars and the chaos of the Middle East, the shortened life span of the Party of Reagan, that’s your doing, fellas, not ours.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: nativist nationalist (#0)
Buchanan is spot on here. Now I'll add to it: Ronald Reagan understood the necessity of protecting Social Security. You cannot win the middle class by targeting the social insurance networks that allows them some security in life.
Today's conservatives praise Reagan while being totally against what he stood for. It's weird.
Go Pat Go!
Buchanan/Warren in 2016!!!
Well, they're angry. And they have the right to be! Somebody stole their country and made it into something that is progressively more difficult and ominous. Unfortunately, the political operatives are there to channel their energy at the wrong targets. The fascists in Germany were very skilled at doing the same thing. It was effective at making a political movement, but because the ideas were bad, the result didn't work. That is the problem with conservative Republicanism: it's based on factual inaccuracies. In other words: Garbage In, Garbage Out. But none of that is to say that the grievances of conservatives aren't legitimate. They are very legitimate. The problem is that the political party (the GOP) and the philosophy (a sort of Ayn Randian free-market) they've chosen as the vehicle for redressing their grievances are wholly inappropriate and inadequate medicine. Having lashed themselves to the mast of the wrong cause, they find themselves going down with a sinking ship, which merely compounds their woes.
The Wall Street Journal has so few readers that they have to troll Pat Buchanan to insult them, in the hopes of bringing a few viewers to their pitiful site. The Bush/Obama globalist neocons are dead, but they don't know it. Clueless to the very end.
Having lashed themselves to the mast of the wrong cause, they find themselves going down with a sinking ship, which merely compounds their woes. One of the great things the Catholic Conquistadors did was put an end to the horrors of human sacrifice by the natives in Central America and elsewhere. I recall reading that the Aztecs and others feared for the worse because now the gods would not get their blood and the sun would stop shining and the rains would stop falling, etc. But none of that happened. The natives realized within one season they worshiped false gods. They converted to Catholicism quickly after that. We had under Bush as much of this Ayn Rand economics as could be hoped for - deregulation (and that is also on the Clinton Democrats), low taxes, a push to privatize social security, privatization of utilities like in California and it all proved a disaster. The economic god they worshiped also turned out to be false. And I am sure many Republicans who were once true believers left the faith of Reaganomics many others doubled down. Even today, I hear Republicans mention privatizing SS. These dead ideas still exist like zombies eating Republican brains. That is a puzzlement to me.
Unfortunately, the political operatives are there to Is that why you vote Democrat?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
Depends on the election and candidate.
Not quite. The fall of Communism plus the rise of the Internet added 3+ billion new competitors to the global economy. It also added 3+ billion new customers, but U.S. manufacturers were too brain dead STUPID to go after those customers. For a long while, U.S. companies ignored foreign markets. When they finally tried to enter some of those markets they didn't take the time to learn about them. This was the real problem. American companies like Boeing, Microsoft and others make more money overseas than at home. So, it can be done. Buchanan's protectionist hogwash would sacrifice smart companies to protect stupid ones. Not too bright. Not too bright at all.
I see you are talking without any facts again. What a surprise. Bush created the first new entitlement program since the Great Society -- prescription drugs for the greedy geezer lobby. He palled up with fat boy Ted Kennedy to launch the largest federal intrusion into the classroom room in history -- the failed "No Child Left Behind" nonsense. He signed the largest pork barrel spending bill in U.S. history -- the 2002 "infrastructure" budget, complete with bridges to nowhere. Then he bailed out the Wall Street banksters. BIG GOVERNMENT failed under Bush, not "Ayn Rand economics".
I don't vote Democrat. Democrats are babykillers.
I don't vote Democrat. Democrats are babykillers. It is abundantly clear from your posts that you favor Democrats over Republicans.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
It is abundantly clear that I favor Democrat economics and concepts of social insurance over Republican economics and social insurance. It is abundantly clear that I think that Democrats are babykillers, and that Republicans have connived at abortion. Nevertheless I have voted for Republicans in the past on the grounds that some of them, at least, persuaded me that they were trying to eliminate abortion. I no longer believe them on this, but I did. It is abundantly clear that I don't agree with either party on maintaining the empire. So, what should be abundantly clear is that what I want to see is Republicans actually being HONEST, for a change, and really using their power to uphold their stated platform and strike down abortion, while simultaneously growing brains and understanding that worldwide empire is a bank-breaker, especially given that social insurance is a necessity. That is what should be clear. I think Republicans are liars about abortion, and economic fools, and they could stop being liars and grow up about economics. I think Democrats are unredeemable, unrepentant murderers. I've said these things over and over. Folks like you keep trying to force me into your simple-minded Bush-y "You're with us or you're against us." I'm against you Republicans because you are lying sacks of shit when it comes to abortion, incompetent on national security, and morons on economics. I'm against Democrats because they are mass murderers of babies - the modern Nazis. I expect Republicans to know better, because I used to be one. A pox on both houses. I'm against BOTH of you. Democrats are smarter on economics than Republicans. And Nazis were better at building jets than Americans. So what?
Yes he is. I am sure the GOP Establishment hates him, because he is correct!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Of course they do. They are all business school graduates,and "Thou shall have no God above profits" is the mantra they live by. On top of that they hate patriotism because they see it as a unnecessary barrier to international profits and trades. It's all about the Benjamins to them. The WSJ accuses us of being anti-growth. But as trade surpluses add to a nation’s GDP, trade deficits subtract from it. Does the WSJ think our $11 trillion in trade deficits since 1992 represents a pro-growth policy? How can you NOT "get it",Pat? Just how freaking blind to reality are you? The WSJ and threir subscribers are concerned SOLELY with profits in the form of dividends and they don't give a damn where those dividends are coming from. Money knows no borders,and influences is a international tool. Sovereign nations get in the way of those profits with import and export taxes,environment laws,labor laws,etc,etc,etc. Don't get me wrong,they understand perfectly that government is needed to keep the masses from rising up and hanging them,but the only governments they want are the ones they own and control. Pat probably still believes the Fascists lost WW-2.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Maybe they will start publishing in Chinese and Yiddish,and gain back their numbers?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
HorseHillary! What they did was close down their US plants and open new plants in the 3rd world. For all practical purposes here is no manufacturing in this country left that employes more than 100 people. It's gone,and it's not coming back.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Pat Buchanan is one of America's GREAT men. His comment is silly though. It just doesn't matter in a oligarchic nation tainted in fascism.
"Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains." Thomas Jefferson
That "protectionist hogwash" was what built American industry in the first place. There is nothing bright about spending more than you earn, consuming saved wealth for the pleasure of the moment. That's the hippy lifestyle, the modern Davos-Doha-WSJ Republicans advocate that type of spendthrift policy.
He most often is.
Exactly! Too few understand that. They have learned nothing from history.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Thomas Jefferson Thanks for the quote! I had never seen that one,but you can bet I will use it in the future.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
That's because most of them were raised to believe they were born knowing everything they need to know,and that history is for losers who live in the past.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
These modern day Republicans turns the old values of our forefathers upon their heads. This nation was built by people who emulated the ants from Aesop's fable, these hippy style Republicans who elect guys like Bush, Graham and McCain praise the spendthrift consumption of the grasshopper.
I became aware of it from an article Pat wrote back in 2013. I read the book he referred to after reading his column, it was a pretty good book too.
Can I ask you a serious question? Why do you make stuff up that is easily disprovable? GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, BMW, Intel, on and on and on... have less than 100 employees in the U.S. ? REALLY????? No.
True, but this has nothing to do with protectionism. It's a different topic.
Why do you make stuff up that is easily disprovable? GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, BMW, Intel, on and on and on... have less than 100 employees in the U.S. ? REALLY????? And FordmGM,Chrysler (the others aren't American corporations) aren't international corporations that only employ Americans? I bought a new Chevrolet HHR several years ago,and the SOB was made in Mexico. Besides,it wasn't manufacturers like GM,Ford,etc that employed most Americans. It was small and medium-sized manufacturers that were solely based in American cities. Some of them may have sold internationally occasionally,but all their manufacturing was done right here in America. Take a ride though High Point,NC sometime and look at all the closed furniture factories. 20 years or so ago High Point was famous over most of the world for the furntiture built there. Now all the factories are boarded up and nothing is made there anymore. All the smaller satellite businesess that provided the furntiture factories with supplies and services are also out of business,and all those jobs are gone forever and never coming back. You sound like just one more globalist asshole. Eat shit and die.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It's a different topic. Same topic. Running a trade deficit is spending more than you earn, just like Aesop's grasshopper who lived only for the present. Those are hippy values, the modern GOP embraces those hippy values by supporting Obamatrade.
BRAVO, BRAVO!
Si vis pacem, para bellum
That equates to bad trade policy enabled by the U.S. dollar being the world reserve currency.
Rant and rave all you want, but you said said that no U.S. manufacturer employees more than 100 people. It's just not even close to being true. Lying doesn't work. If you want to make a change, you have to base your arguments in facts, not lies.
You and I are probably on the same side with regards to manufacturing. The difference is that you are so angry that you just make stuff up while lashing out. The people in Ferguson were angry and lashed out too. Was that a helpful approach???
It's just not even close to being true. Lying doesn't work. If you want to make a change, you have to base your arguments in facts, not lies. I don't like,you scum-sucking piece of shit. GM,Ford,etc,etc,etc are NOT "US Manufacturers". They are international corporations that have SOME manufacturing facilities in the US.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
No,the difference is you are just looking on the surface,and tben accusing me of lying. US manufacturers only manufacture goods within the US,and there are damn few left that employ more than 100 people.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
That equates to bad trade policy enabled by the U.S. dollar being the world reserve currency. Bad trade policy which includes allowing in more imports than we can finance through exports. We need to protect against that happening, protecting what we love is good, it is not bad.
The big corporations like to boast of how they are not American corporations, unless they need a bailout. GE ECO Jeffrey Immelt expressed this attitude thusly: When I look at our businesses outside the United States [they are] very robust and very strong, I really am not worried" about the credit crunch, U.S. housing crisis and high energy costs. For our company, I view this as more opportunity than downside. I think you've got to be cautious about the U.S. consumer, but over the last five years we have really positioned ourselves as a global company. What I'm about to say might be good news or it might be bad news: the world has never been more independent from the U.S. economy. If the U.S. economy goes into a recession, the rest of the world is going to feel it, but in my business life, I've never seen as much sense that there are other economies around the world that can absorb the growth. Charlie Rose Show, November 8th, 2007. Once the Davos-Doha-WSJ's house of cards collapsed, GE's finance arm, GECC (an investment bank) was given FDIC coverage as part of all the bailouts for the money changers. What the ruling class preaches they definitely do not practice.
The big corporations like to boast of how they are not American corporations, unless they need a bailout. GE ECO Jeffrey Immelt expressed this attitude thusly: Please correct me if I am wrong,but doesn't GE belong to the Chinese now? They might have a white western "front man",but the profits go to China.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
They certainly demonstrate loyalty to China rather than the US.
Comments (41 - 48) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
Ronald Reagan understood the necessity of protecting Social Security. You cannot win the middle class by targeting the social insurance networks that allows them some security in life.
#3. To: nativist nationalist (#0)
#4. To: Pericles (#2)
Today's conservatives praise Reagan while being totally against what he stood for. It's weird.
#5. To: nativist nationalist, *Neo-Lib Chickenhawk Wars* (#0)
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#6. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
But none of that is to say that the grievances of conservatives aren't legitimate. They are very legitimate. The problem is that the political party (the GOP) and the philosophy (a sort of Ayn Randian free-market) they've chosen as the vehicle for redressing their grievances are wholly inappropriate and inadequate medicine.
#7. To: Vicomte13, Pericles, All (#4)
Well, they're angry. And they have the right to be! Somebody stole their country and made it into something that is progressively more difficult and ominous.
#8. To: SOSO (#7)
Is that why you vote Democrat?
#9. To: nativist nationalist (#0)
(Edited)
#10. To: Pericles (#6)
Bush as much of this Ayn Rand economics
#11. To: SOSO (#7)
Is that why you vote Democrat?
#12. To: Vicomte13 (#11)
Is that why you vote Democrat?
#13. To: SOSO (#12)
(Edited)
It is abundantly clear from your posts that you favor Democrats over Republicans.
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
" Buchanan is spot on here. "
#15. To: nativist nationalist (#0)
Does the Journal regard this gutting of the greatest industrial base the world had ever seen, which gave America an independence no republic had ever known, an acceptable price of its New World Order?
#16. To: hondo68 (#5)
The Wall Street Journal has so few readers that they have to troll Pat Buchanan to insult them, in the hopes of bringing a few viewers to their pitiful site.
#17. To: cranko (#9)
For a long while, U.S. companies ignored foreign markets. When they finally tried to enter some of those markets they didn't take the time to learn about them. This was the real problem.
#18. To: nativist nationalist (#0)
Only once since 1988 has a Republican presidential nominee won the popular vote.
#19. To: sneakypete (#15)
They are all business school graduates,and "Thou shall have no God above profits" is the mantra they live by.
#20. To: cranko (#9)
Buchanan's protectionist hogwash would sacrifice smart companies to protect stupid ones. Not too bright. Not too bright at all.
#21. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
Buchanan is spot on here.
#22. To: nativist nationalist (#20)
" That "protectionist hogwash" was what built American industry in the first place. "
#23. To: nativist nationalist (#19)
Merchants have no country. The mere spot they stand on does not constitute so strong an attachment as that from which they draw their gains."
#24. To: Stoner (#22)
They have learned nothing from history.
#25. To: Stoner (#22)
Exactly! Too few understand that. They have learned nothing from history.
#26. To: sneakypete (#23)
Thanks for the quote! I had never seen that one,but you can bet I will use it in the future.
#27. To: sneakypete (#17)
here is no manufacturing in this country left that employes more than 100 people
#28. To: nativist nationalist (#20)
(Edited)
There is nothing bright about spending more than you earn
#29. To: cranko (#27)
(Edited)
Can I ask you a serious question?
#30. To: cranko (#28)
True, but this has nothing to do with protectionism.
#31. To: sneakypete, cranko (#29)
" You sound like just one more globalist asshole. Eat shit and die. "
#32. To: nativist nationalist (#30)
Running a trade deficit
#33. To: sneakypete (#29)
blah... blah... blah...
#34. To: sneakypete (#29)
#35. To: cranko (#33)
Rant and rave all you want, but you said said that no U.S. manufacturer employees more than 100 people.
#36. To: cranko (#34)
The difference is that you are so angry that you just make stuff up while lashing out.
#37. To: cranko (#32)
Running a trade deficit
#38. To: sneakypete (#35)
They are international corporations that have SOME manufacturing facilities in the US.
#39. To: nativist nationalist (#38)
#40. To: sneakypete (#39)
Please correct me if I am wrong,but doesn't GE belong to the Chinese now? They might have a white western "front man",but the profits go to China.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]