Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Pat Buchanan voices qualified support for Edwards

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:29 PM
Original message
Pat Buchanan voices qualified support for Edwards
Edited on Thu Feb-19-04 07:31 PM by Feanorcurufinwe
Hardball, Feb. 18, 2004:
JACKSON: Let me say this.

MATTHEWS: Go ahead. Go ahead.

(CROSSTALK)

JACKSON: ... student activists and Pat Buchanan all support Edwards.

That itself is a broadening of the base.

MATTHEWS: Do you support Edwards?

BUCHANAN: I support Edwards‘ campaign, yes. I would like to see him do well. I would like to see him go forward with this issue. I would like to see him make it at the convention, because it‘s important for the country.

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: Reverend Jackson

(CROSSTALK)

JACKSON: And Pat Buchanan is closer ideologically to John Edwards than he is to George Bush. And that itself again is expanding the base.

MATTHEWS: Is that the case?

BUCHANAN: Well, if you get all—on the jobs issue, yes.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3719710


Oh you should've seen Jesse Jackson smile while Buchanan was saying that -- classic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Taeger Donating Member (914 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Armageddon .. Cats and Dogs living together !!!!

Wow, Jesse Jackson and Pat Buchanan united against Bush. Who would have thought?????

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryYoungMan Donating Member (856 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. "So be good, for goodness' sake.... WHOOOAAHHHH......"
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. isn't that line from 12 monkeys?
seems vaguely familiar...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestTransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. I've noticed that Buchanan has been on Hardball
a lot and doesn't seem to be a big fan of Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cuban_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:33 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Buchannan doesn't like Bush at ALL
You should hear him on McLaughlin some times. He is NO friend of GWB...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
25. all fiscal conservatives should be VERY uncomfortable with Bush
as should foreign policy conservatives

and anyone with a brain
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmaier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. He is a fierce isolationist
on foreign policy and has been stridently at odds with the neo-con/PNAC agenda. That said, he is horrific on immigration and cultural conservatism issues so we don't really want to claim him as one of our own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShaneGR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. Buchanon has been VERY anti-bush for a while now
Though sometimes he slips, he's been particularly hard on Bush for a while. Don't forget that Buchanon's campaigns invariably involved talk of limiting free-trade, though he mixed it with some weird close down the border stuff.

It's interestign to read conservatives rip on Bush.

http://www.amconmag.com/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyFianna1 Donating Member (218 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Pat and Jesse
Only one person can have both Jesse Jackason and Patrick Buchanon railing against him at the same time, the great uniter (of Democrats and Independents and Greens) George W.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #7
28. lol and welcome to DU, JF1!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrFunkenstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
8. Didn't Buchanan Leave The GOP To Oppose Bush?
I'm pretty sure he went to the Reform Party in 1999.

Honestly, I completely disagree with Buchanan on almost every policy imaginable, but I see him as smart and sincere. I prefer that much more to Bush's anything-to-get-elected agenda.

And I think he's great on the MacLaughlin Group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
foo_bar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Buchanan sincere?
He outranks Lucianne Goldberg on the Nixonian GOP trickster scale. It's like saying "that G. Liddy sure tells it like it is". Buchanan joined the Reform Party to destroy it, thus allowing a 3-way with Nader.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
9. They're both populists,
its just that they arrive at their ends in vastly different ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Edward's voting record in the Senate is not populist, only his campaign
John Edward's voting record in the Senate belies his populist rhetoric. Edwards voted for the China trade deal in 2000 and the egregious bankruptcy bill in 2001.

China trade vote: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=2&vote=00251

Bankruptcy vote: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00036

John Edward's Anti-Environmental Votes in the Senate from PIRG website:

2000

~Voted against increased funding for renewable energy

2001

~Voted to continue dumping mountain top removal waste into rivers and streams

2002

~Voted against increased renewables for energy use
~Voted against increased CAFE standards
~Voted to weaken the Safe Water Drinking Act by expanding oil/gas drilling using hydraulic fracturing
~Voted to continue factory farm subsidies, i.e. hog farms

2003

~Voted against keeping polluters responsible for pollution
~Voted to send waste to Yucca Mountain

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgpenn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
10. He has since Dean's campaign ending Scream!
The repukes needed a new puppet to dilute the Dem. process!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anti-NAFTA Donating Member (900 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
14. This is basically the seal of approval as far as trade is concerned.
Anyone who gets Buchanan's support, like Gephardt and Kucinich, is probably trustworthy on the issue of trade policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
15. Pat Buchanan is part of the Paleos
& hates the NeoCons.

The Paleos are much more isolationist, against imperialism & the wars it launches. He has carried the banner against Perle, Wolfowitz, etc.
And has been accused of being an anti-Semite. I really don't think that he is. He is against putting Israel's interests ahead of the USA.

Paleos are also against Free Trade & 1 world government run for corporate interests. The Bushes hate him for running against Bush Sr.
He also ran on a very populist platform, & it's logical he would find Edwards attractive.

Buchanan opposed the Iraq war, big time, & has been hammered by the Bush bots, Freepers, & NeoCons for a long time for going off the reservation.

I don't agree with Buchanan all the time, but I respect him. He stands on his principles, even when the hate is obsessive towards him.
And he is sharp, he's forgotten more about politics than most people ever knew.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Yeah Pat is ok for a republican
He scares me on immigration and minority issues though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Pat is against open immigration
& open borders. He says that unless the borders are secure, a nation is not soverign, & I agree with that.

His argument is part of the jobs thing: illegal immigrants hold down the wages of Americans, therefore they get pounded by outsourcing, & pounded by illegal labor.

The unions used to agree with this position, until Hispanics became a major voting bloc, & they changed their stance.

I disagree with Buchanan on his rabid pro life stance; the paleos used to be libertarian about personal stuff, but now they're Fundies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. I have never been convinced
That our borders can be 100% secure, especially when there is a 3rd world country along a huge stretch of it. On the other hand it probably can be improved quite a bit.

I think, the best answer for illegal immigration is enforcing laws on the books with regard to companies hiring illegals and improving the documentation system such that it is much more costly to defeat with false identification.

You are much more up on Pat than I am, I was going off some vague memories. Lielani shows some political chops! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leilani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #22
29. Hey, thanks Jim!
I've been a political junkie my entire life.

I agree with you completely about companies & illegal immigration.
The companies are screwing American workers & exploiting illegals.
They should face stiff consequences by ignoring the law.

And you're right, the borders can never be 100% secure, but can be improved. I think Bush is really vulnerable on this issue, because he talks about homeland security, but talk is cheap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mouse7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
16. Well... if you were still looking for a reason to support Kerry...
...there you go.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anti-NAFTA Donating Member (900 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. No, this is a reason to support Edwards.
Pat Buchanan only supports candidates who have a sensible, pro-American trade policy. Nice try, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mouse7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #17
33. If I EVER consider voting the same as Buchanan does, kill me.
Edited on Fri Feb-20-04 05:06 AM by mouse7
Just put me out of my freakin' misery.

Buchanan only considers candidates that put white surburban people first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anti-NAFTA Donating Member (900 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:43 PM
Response to Original message
19. This is important. KICK!!! eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corporatewhore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
20. that makes him look better in my eyes pat is good when it comes to trade
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meldread Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
23. Bump.
This speaks well for Edwards -- the fact that he can pick off some votes from Bush. (People who would otherwise stay home or vote for him simply because, to them, there was no better alternative.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
24. omigosh, is PB evolving into another Arianna? How great would
that be?

I think there is some chance that could happen, since some liberals like him and may influence him a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
charlie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. No, Pat isn't evolving
His party just moved out from under him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooky3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Feb-19-04 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. darn, it was too good to be true
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no one in particular Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 12:24 AM
Response to Original message
30. In all fairness..
Edited on Fri Feb-20-04 12:26 AM by no one in particular
Let me preface my remarks by saying that I worked for the 1996 Buchanan campaign. Many of my views have become more liberal since then, but a few positions, i.e. abortion and immigration, are still squarely in the paleocon camp.


Anyhow...There is a large undercurrent of the population that would, if you polled them point-by-point, qualify as paleocons. Many don't vote, thinking the system is inherently corrupt, but could be persuaded to vote if issues important to them were highlighted. Such issues as free trade hurting workers, unnecessary foreign wars and fiscal policies benefiting the rich at expense of the working-class would resonate with these people and not hurt the Democratic base.


Just a thought.

On edit - Just to tweak your freeper friends, remind them Rush endorsed Buchanan in '92.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robsul82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
31. I just remember an SNL McLaughlin Group skit...
...where Dana Carvey, playing an INSANE John, screams at Phil Hartman, playing Pat, "PATTY PATTY BUCH BUCH!" I just wonder what Pat would do if ANYONE called him "PATTY PATTY BUCH BUCH!"

Later.

RJS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toby109 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 05:00 AM
Response to Original message
32. What the...?
Anybody remember his '92 convention speech?

www.buchanan.org/pa-92-0817-rnc.html

Maybe he's had a change of heart. Maybe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 05:06 AM
Response to Original message
34. LOL so I guess this is a pro-Kerry post, eh, Fear?
:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feanorcurufinwe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. No

I was laughing out loud at the way Jesse 'played' Buchanan.

I wish you could have seen it. Pat was being so earnest and serious and Jackson was exhibiting such obvious glee that he had provoked those comments.

I thought folks here would enjoy it, and if anything, it's a pro-Edwards post, for the exact reasons Jesse stated: "student activists and Pat Buchanan all support Edwards. That itself is a broadening of the base."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meldread Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-20-04 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
35. bump -nt-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WiseMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-22-04 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
37. Run Pat Run. America Needs You!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 07:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC