Pat Buchanan is a jerk

[WillInMiami]

He was just interviewed by Wolf Blitzer - didn't mention Paul one time. Says he would bet on Huckabee to win the nomination. I thought this guy was supposed to be a libertarian leaning conservative...

[MozoVote]

Come on, we've had MANY threads about this. Buchanan is a sellout. He's a paid commentator for the main stream media. Get over it, he will not be shilling for Ron Paul.

(I don't want his endorsement anyway. He destroyed the Reform party, and he is too polarizing a figure to reach out to independents.)

[kushaze]

He was just interviewed by Wolf Blitzer - didn't mention Paul one time. Says he would bet on Huckabee to win the nomination. I thought this guy was supposed to be a libertarian leaning conservative...

Pat Buchanan doesn't want Huckabee to win. He just knows that the republican party is in shambles and would expect that the GOP would nominate such a loser like Huckabee.

[10thAmendmentMan]

He's paleoconservative -- not libertarian. He doesn't like foreign intervention or high taxes, but he does like some faith-based legislation.

[spacebetween]

He's paleoconservative -- not libertarian. He doesn't like foreign intervention or high taxes, but he does like some faith-based legislation.

And closed borders.

[MS0453]

Plus he's a protectionist and a populist.

[Compulsive1]

Buchanan is owned by the Evangelical wing of the party. He is just playing their game- making Huckabee look electable.

[literatim]

He is an analyst giving his analysis.

[RPinSEAZ]

Why is it considered being a jerk if he's giving his opinion of who's going to win? Personally I think Mitt Romney is probably going to win, but I'm still working to make it otherwise. He wasn't asked who does he want to win. It's his job, get over it.

[jd603]

Bingo, he's on board with pushing Huckabee even though he's a joke of a candidate. All in the name of taking steam away from Ron Paul.



Come on, we've had MANY threads about this. Buchanan is a sellout. He's a paid commentator for the main stream media. Get over it, he will not be shilling for Ron Paul.

(I don't want his endorsement anyway. He destroyed the Reform party, and he is too polarizing a figure to reach out to independents.)

[WillInMiami]

Why is it considered being a jerk if he's giving his opinion of who's going to win? Personally I think Mitt Romney is probably going to win, but I'm still working to make it otherwise. He wasn't asked who does he want to win. It's his job, get over it.

He's a jerk because he's prmoting a new book that talks about the end of America as we know it and then talks up a guy that will help to ensure that his predictions come true.

How about this: that's MY opinion - you get over it prick.

[familydog]

Just because he says he thinks a certain person will win the nomination doesn't mean that's who he wants to see win. Analysts tend to do those crazy things.

[MS0453]

He is an analyst giving his analysis.

I agree. But it really wouldn't surprise me if he liked Huck.

[RPinSEAZ]

Huckabee can't get elected in the general election. I think the republican party will realize Huck doesn't stand a chance against Hillary.

In this divided Republican party it's all about the delegates. If you want to know who is going to get nominated look who has them.

[Spirit of '76]

Pat's the man, and this thread officially sucks.

[Meatwasp]

Pat's the man, and this thread officially sucks.

Your kidding no doubt??????? I think he is jealous of Ron!

[Flash]

Romney has a bigger chance than Huckabee. I have no idea what Pat Buchanan says sometimes.


And, it is good that Pat Buchanan doesn't openly endorse Ron Paul. Does anyone remember these gems that Buchanan has made over the years:

http://www.mtsu.edu/~baustin/buchanan.html


Do we really want him openly supporting Ron Paul?

[literatim]

Romney has a bigger chance than Huckabee. I have no idea what Pat Buchanan says sometimes.


And, it is good that Pat Buchanan doesn't openly endorse Ron Paul. Does anyone remember these gems that Buchanan has made over the years:

http://www.mtsu.edu/~baustin/buchanan.html


Do we really want him openly supporting Ron Paul?

Yes, we do.

[Spirit of '76]

Your kidding no doubt??????? I think he is jealous of Ron!

No, I'm not kidding at all.

If there's one thing 7 months of being on this forum have taught me, it's that I'd be an idiot to take seriously everyone who comes on here and posts some bombastic thread about how outraged they are that some media figure didn't kiss Ron's ass to their satisfaction.

And that's doubly true when they start calling Pat Buchanan an "establishment shill". :rolleyes:

If Pat says right now that he thinks Huckabee has the best chance of winning the nomination, then it's probably because his experience in the world of Republican politics leads him to believe that Huckabee has the best chance of winning the nomination, not because he wants Ron to fail, but because that's the way things look to him right now.

In the meantime, I suggest everyone head over to Pat's blog and see how many candidates besides Ron Paul get their own category of entries. While you're there, count up the number of Ron Paul youtube videos posted versus those of the other candidates:
http://www.buchanan.org/blog/

:rolleyes:

[Flash]

Yes, we do.

Even if he had made all those racist comments? Do we need a worse reputation?

[dircha]

Get some perspective. Looking at the polls, and considering it is nearly the end of 4th quarter, if you are a political analyst, can you credibly predict that Ron Paul is most likely to win the nomination?

No. He can win, yes, and Pat might want him to win personally, but as an analyst he is payed to be objective, not emotional, and right now the facts do not point to a Ron Paul nomination as the most likely.

Our job is to change those facts. That's part of what we're doing today. And what we still desperately need to do in unprecedented time in New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, Nevada, and Michigan.

[jd603]

Uhhh? He has a much better chance than Huckabee. Are you fooled?




Get some perspective. Looking at the polls, and considering it is nearly the end of 4th quarter, if you are a political analyst, can you credibly predict that Ron Paul is most likely to win the nomination?

No. He can win, yes, and Pat might want him to win personally, but as an analyst he is payed to be objective, not emotional, and right now the facts do not point to a Ron Paul nomination as the most likely.

Our job is to change those facts. That's part of what we're doing today. And what we still desperately need to do in unprecedented time in New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, Nevada, and Michigan.

[JMann]

Buchanan is owned by the Evangelical wing of the party. He is just playing their game- making Huckabee look electable.

That is BS. PJB is a Catholic not and Evangelical.

I should add that PJB is a real Catholic which isn't very consistent with public service. He isn't a Catholic in name only like the Kennedy's or Kerry or those other pretenders. Catholics have very strict rules they must follow and Buchanan follows them.

[Spirit of '76]

Even if he had made all those racist comments? Do we need a worse reputation?

Consider the fact that the guy who put together that compilation of out-of-context Buchanan quotes makes his living off selling multiculturalism and racial hysteria to gullible college kids, and understand that you should take everything he says about Pat with a heaping helping of salt.

[jd603]

Buchanan is living well off the MSM, he chooses that over standing on his principals.

Same with Tucker, there's a reason he went from saying nothing bad about Ron Paul to slashing him while pretending to support him. His cozy job.

[familydog]

So I guess from now on when Pat says something nice about Ron Paul, we should boo him and send him nasty emails since he is nothing more than a sellout.

[JTCoyoté]

He's a jerk because he's prmoting a new book that talks about the end of America as we know it and then talks up a guy that will help to ensure that his predictions come true.

How about this: that's MY opinion - you get over it prick.

Wrongly held opinions can be changes in the light of facts with most folks... Superficial gloss-over type folks however are too intellectually lazy to look at facts... sound bites and titles are all they need to be led to the slaughter.

Pat has been sounding the warning on America's takeover since he left the Reagan WhiteHouse when GHWBush took over... he has written 4 books on the who, how, where, when, and why, of the take over and this last book shows the endgame. In this last book he gives a solution as to how to stop the globalist juggernaut... Not surprising, the solution he gives is very much like the movement we are all involved in with Ron Paul...

Go to his blog... http://buchanan.org/blog/ ...and see who he is supporting... stop judging the book by it's cover and the man by one "steered" interview... by that globalist shill Wolf Blitzer.

JTCoyoté

"The Neo-Cons don't win elections...
they attach themselves to the winners."
~P.J. Buchanan, on Alex Jones 12/5/07

[Thomas Paine]

It's time to start boycotting Pat "Sellout" Buchanan.

[hocaltar]

Come on, we've had MANY threads about this. Buchanan is a sellout. He's a paid commentator for the main stream media. Get over it, he will not be shilling for Ron Paul.

(I don't want his endorsement anyway. He destroyed the Reform party, and he is too polarizing a figure to reach out to independents.)


He is not a sell out, that man has done more good for this country than 99.99% of us ever will. He is a commentator. If he though Ron Paul would win the nomination, he would have said so. Huckabee may win the nomination; however, the GOP is finished without our grassroots support.

[Spirit of '76]

It's time to start boycotting Pat "Sellout" Buchanan.

:rolleyes:

It Paines me to say this, but get a clue.

[jd603]

Wrong, he doesn't think Huckabee would win, he knows he won't ... and he still said it...




He is not a sell out, that man has done more good for this country than 99.99% of us ever will. He is a commentator. If he though Ron Paul would win the nomination, he would have said so. Huckabee may win the nomination; however, the GOP is finished without our grassroots support.

[Spirit of '76]

Wrong, he doesn't think Huckabee would win, he knows he won't ... and he still said it...

How do you know he "knows" Huckabee won't win? How do you know Huckabee won't win?

He'll at least win Iowa, and that's worth a lot. With all the MSM support he's getting and the fact that he's surging past Mitt and Rudy, I'd say he could indeed win the nomination. He'll get creamed in the general election, of course, but that doesn't mean the GOP won't give him the nod.

Now it's up to us to make sure that doesn't happen, but we certainly can't afford to rest on our laurels, nor can we afford to underestimate Mike Huckabee.

[jd603]

"Surging past"? The polls are mostly fake/orchestrated , maybe some of them are not as bad an Frank Lunz but they are hand crafted.

Ron will not win Iowa, Iowa still uses Diebold(tm) , NH however still has paper balots, expect Huckabee to make a poor showing there, Ron to kill him (possibly even win the state).



How do you know he "knows" Huckabee won't win? How do you know Huckabee won't win?

He'll at least win Iowa, and that's worth a lot. With all the MSM support he's getting and the fact that he's surging past Mitt and Rudy, I'd say he could indeed win the nomination. He'll get creamed in the general election, of course, but that doesn't mean the GOP won't give him the nod.

Now it's up to us to make sure that doesn't happen, but we certainly can't afford to rest on our laurels, nor can we afford to underestimate Mike Huckabee.

[FreeTraveler]

I'm getting tired of all the nice things being said about Pat Buchanan. Most of you must be too young to remember him as the speechwriter for that GREAT president, Richard Millhouse Nixon, who was the first socialist president who pretended to be a Republican. PB would be more of the same.

[Spirit of '76]

"Surging past"? The polls are mostly fake/orchestrated , maybe some of them are not as bad an Frank Lunz but they are hand crafted.

I agree the polls do not accurately reflect public sentiment. Still Huckabee's support is building while Mitt's and Rudy's is dropping off.

I don't need a poll to tell me that. I can figure that out just by talking to my neighbors. I can figure that out by looking at the big last-minute push for Huckabee delegates here in WV.



Ron will not win Iowa, Iowa still uses Diebold(tm) , NH however still has paper balots, expect Huckabee to make a poor showing there, Ron to kill him (possibly even win the state).

I agree that Ron has a chance to win New Hampshire. But we must not assume that it's a given, nor should we assume that Huckabee won't make a good showing in South Carolina, Michigan, or any of the other early primary states.

I'd say Huck's chances are at least as good as ours right now, and to write him off as a failure at this point would be foolish on our part, just as we know it's foolish for the neocons to write off Ron Paul.

[dircha]

I'm getting tired of all the nice things being said about Pat Buchanan. Most of you must be too young to remember him as the speechwriter for that GREAT president, Richard Millhouse Nixon, who was the first socialist president who pretended to be a Republican. PB would be more of the same.

Not to mention he's a staunch protectionist to this day.

[Spirit of '76]

I'm getting tired of all the nice things being said about Pat Buchanan.

Deal with it.


Most of you must be too young to remember him as the speechwriter for that GREAT president, Richard Millhouse Nixon, who was the first socialist president who pretended to be a Republican. PB would be more of the same.

Yeah, Buchanan is clearly a socialist. :rolleyes:

[Spirit of '76]

By the way, guess where I first learned about Ron Paul...

[JTCoyoté]

I'm getting tired of all the nice things being said about Pat Buchanan. Most of you must be too young to remember him as the speechwriter for that GREAT president, Richard Millhouse Nixon, who was the first socialist president who pretended to be a Republican. PB would be more of the same.

Pat was a young speech writer for Nixon... your assessment of Nixon is skewed however... I voted for him twice... I understood why he was paranoid about the enemies he had... they weren't just the democrats... there were the "Neo-Trotsky war-hawk refugees" from the Dem party that attached themselves to the socialist Rockefeller wing of the Republicans as well. Nixon's Paranoia was well founded, there were rascals on both sides... Watergate was a coup from within that served up the Republican party lock, stock, and barrel to be taken over by the Neo-cons... under Ford/Rockefeller...

Revisionist history has given you your view... get a clue!

JTCoyoté

"The Neo-Cons don't win elections...
they attach themselves to the winners."
~P.J. Buchanan, on Alex Jones 12/5/07

[TN_VOL]

C'mon give Buchanan a break. I like him. He is a news analyst/author now, not a spokesman for Ron Paul. If every time he was on TV he talked about Ron Paul then they would quit having him on because he would not seem impartial. Plus his sister works for Tancredo. Oh and he will be on C-Span at 6 eastern time.

[JTCoyoté]

Pat will be on C-SPAN2 3 times today on AfterWords talking about his book with Diana West... it airs at 6pm, 9pm, and midnight eastern today 12-16-07...

JTCoyoté

"The Neo-Cons don't win elections...
they attach themselves to the winners."
~P.J. Buchanan, on Alex Jones 12/5/07

[Proemio]

He is not a sell out, that man has done more good for this country than 99.99% of us ever will. He is a commentator. If he though Ron Paul would win the nomination, he would have said so. Huckabee may win the nomination; however, the GOP is finished without our grassroots support.

Don't think so.
If he had told them that he would say such a thing (and independent 'experts' have to), he would not have gotten on the air, in the first place.

What was interesting though, goes something like this (paraphrase):
"IF McCain wins NH then anything can happen". McCain?
Now, if we substitute McCain with someone else... pretty clever.

At first, I went WTF as well, but after a breath or two of considering what was doable in occupied terrirory, it sounded pretty good, particularly when compared to the utter garbage oozing forth from "the best analytical team in politics" afterwards...

Besides, we have a little taste on this very thread - and others - of what cut-and-paste assoults an endorsement by PB would conjure up.
The keyboards are loaded with lists, and fingers are hovering in boilerroms all over (LOL)...