Pat Buchanan Agrees With Obama On Iran (Iraq, school, leader)

[stephen n]

Originally Posted by hotair2

He is not a neo-con. Different breed of conservative. Anti-interventionalist.

I disagree with Buchanan on a number of issues, but I think he hits the nail on the head when it comes to foreign policy.

[ozzie679]

Originally Posted by LML

Because some of these people would gladly see the entire world go up in flames if they could get 5 minutes of partisan rhetoric out of it.

Right on! I think a terrorist attack would be right up their alley.

[ozzie679]

I completely agree with Ron Paul's libertarian stance on the Iran situation. He thinks for himself and has more common sense than most anybody in Washington. I'd vote for him if it weren't for a few issues....

Paul Is Lone Dissenter In Resolution To Support Iranian Protests

The House voted 405-1 today for a resolution in support of the Iranian dissidents and condemning the ruling government. And the one man who opposed it was...Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). Paul said in his floor speech (http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/tx14_paul/iranres.shtml - broken link) that he was in "reluctant opposition" to the resolution -- that he of course condemns violence by governments against their citizens. On the other hand, he also doesn't think the American government should act as a judge of every country overseas, and pointed out that we don't condemn countries like Saudi Arabia or Egypt that don't even have real elections.

[lamontnow]

Originally Posted by kaimuki

I never thought a hard righty would agree with anything Omaba does or says.

Buchanan is a hard right as they come. He's a reincarnation of the pre-WWII isolationists. He opposes any and ALL action against the Iranian regime - economic, financial, ...you name it. And for that matter action anywhere else in the world. He reminds me of the Bundists and other isolationists of the 1930's who vociferously (and successfully) blocked direct American action against the Nazi regime. His agreement on this one point is purely coincidental.

[kaimuki]

Originally Posted by lamontnow

Buchanan is a hard right as they come. He's a reincarnation of the pre-WWII isolationists. He opposes any and ALL action against the Iranian regime - economic, financial, ...you name it. And for that matter action anywhere else in the world. He reminds me of the Bundists and other isolationists of the 1930's who vociferously (and successfully) blocked direct American action against the Nazi regime. His agreement on this one point is purely coincidental.

I agree 100%!

[hotair2]

Originally Posted by lamontnow

Buchanan is a hard right as they come. He's a reincarnation of the pre-WWII isolationists. He opposes any and ALL action against the Iranian regime - economic, financial, ...you name it. And for that matter action anywhere else in the world. He reminds me of the Bundists and other isolationists of the 1930's who vociferously (and successfully) blocked direct American action against the Nazi regime. His agreement on this one point is purely coincidental.

Avoid foreign entanglements," said George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Two other people that I assume you would call isolationist. I would be proud to be put in the same group as these two gentlemen.

Sticks and stones.

[lamontnow]

For the neoisolationists and Buchanan lovers. He has a dark, very dark side.
Here's an example of the sick and extreme view of history presented by your hero:
Why is Pat Buchanan's website playing host to Holocaust deniers?
Pat Buchanan Blames Britain For Holocaust
Well, there was no Holocaust. But if there was, it's Britain's fault. He's been an ardent defender of Nazi war criminals.

Buchanan's bigotry and extremism goes back many years. Here are his views on African-Americans, immigrants, Jews, gays, women, and democracy:
PAT BUCHANAN, ANTISEMITISM AND THE HOLOCAUST
The fact that he is given an outlet on mainstream media is a disgrace. NBC should be swamped with complaints.

[Donn2390]

Obama is a spineless coward who is waiting to see who wins before he decides which side he is on...
His indecision on Iran is just one more nail in his coffin...
Mean while, he is a dancing fool and absolutely "The Man" on date night...

[twista6002]

Yep, because Buchanon is a true conservative - he believes in isolationism. People need to realize that the Bush cowboy diplomacy thing isn't what the republican party stands for historically

[lamontnow]

Originally Posted by twista6002

Yep, because Buchanon is a true conservative - he believes in isolationism.

The last time the conservatives embraced isolationism was pre-WWII, and that was disastrous. Buchanan is a throwback to that time. Isolationism and appeasement go hand in hand.

It's interesting how the extremist right and extremist left converge on isolationism and appeasement. The extreme left and right have more in common with each other they do with moderates of their own party.

They should join together and form a third party with old fashioned isolationism as its theme. Let's see.... how about "The Rest of the World Can Go To H..." party.