Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

March 14, 2008
Playing by Obama's Rules
By Patrick Buchanan

from tomorrows Pittsburgh Tribune

Seems it takes a race baiter to clearly see race baiting.

www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/playing_by_obamas_rules.html

To observe Democrats this week, savaging one of their heroines, is to understand why the party is unready to rule.

Consider: At the 1984 Democratic convention in San Francisco, an unknown member of Congress was vaulted into history by being chosen the first woman ever to run on a national party ticket.

Geraldine Ferraro became a household name. And though the Mondale-Ferraro ticket went down to a 49-state defeat, "Gerry" became an icon to Democratic women.

This week, however, after being subjected for 48 hours to accusations of divisiveness by Barack Obama, and racism by his agents and auxiliaries in the media, Ferraro resigned from Clinton's campaign. What had she said to send the Obamaites into paroxysms of rage?

She stated an obvious truth: Had Barack not been a black male, he probably would not be the front-runner for the nomination.

Here are the words that sent her to the scaffold.

]

Tags: obama (all tags)

Comments

81 Comments

Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I'll save time and just copy and paste my response to the other person that tried to bring this up:

Speaking of Pat Buchanan, how quickly people forget what a backwards S.O.B. he really is. Here's what he said about both Clintons:

"The agenda Clinton & Clinton would impose on America--abortion on demand, a litmus test for the Supreme Court, homosexual rights, discrimination against religious schools, women in combat units--that's change, all right. But it is not the kind of change America needs. It is not the kind of change America wants. And it is not the kind of change we can abide in a nation we still call God's country."

He was also one of Nixon's top advisers, defended him to the end during Watergate, and even suggested Nixon burn the tapes.

This is the man you're agreeing with on how politics works.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

MAYBE THAT'S THE POINT!

You people are so irony free!

{oh no, I said the YP words, of course - that proves   I'm a racist too!}

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Hahahaa... hahaha.. I don't know what's sadder, that you're using Pat Buchanan as a talking point, or that Ferraro's only real defender is Pat Buchanan.

Why is Pat Buchanan involved in a Democratic election?

by Setrak 2008-03-14 12:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth
Because rabid Hillary supporters will support any filth that makes their candidate the nominee, even if its Pat Buchanan
by campaignmonitor 2008-03-14 12:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

He's the only one that can get away with writing this racist, dishonest tripe (kooky old Pat!) and be able to put some kind of quasi-authority behind him. And the idiots that so quickly forget how badly he trashed the Clintons - not to mention being a homophobic, bigoted, sexist ass - eat it up because they can't handle the fact that their horrible attitudes might not actually be acceptable.

I'm disgusted.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Clinton Supporters will look any where for support these days, I guess.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

this was racist too?

how?

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:16PM | 0 recs
The downward spiral keeps on swirling

Pat Buchanan? Priceless.

by Etchasketchist 2008-03-14 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Though I appreciate the article, you probably shouldn't copy and past the whole thing but rather key passages and then provide a link.

by DaveOinSF 2008-03-14 12:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Pat Buchanan? Really?! And MYDD hits a new low.

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-14 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I am sorry are you lost.  Shouldnt you be over at dkos being a blog bully?

david

by giusd 2008-03-14 12:18PM | 0 recs
I am going with

Pat Buchanan.

You really should google up what he been saying about Clintons before this article.

by kindthoughts 2008-03-14 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: I am going with

maybe,

Thats the frigging POINT!

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:15PM | 0 recs
Re: I am going with

Thomas, while I have no problem with you citing Buchanan, you can't quote his entire piece and you especially can't do so without providing a link.  

Does MyDD care about copyright infringement?

by susanhu 2008-03-14 01:19PM | 0 recs
Yeah

thank for bringing in Pat into this.

You know by looking at your posting pattern.

In your last two diaries you posted articled of two right wing wingnuts and expressed concern about Obama based on that.

You sir are the definition of a troll.

by kindthoughts 2008-03-14 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah

oh no.

I shall now go slay myself.

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:13PM | 0 recs
no, no

keep healthy...

Just move to redstate.com

They will love you there.

by kindthoughts 2008-03-14 05:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

How very typical that Clinton's supporters on this site have taken to quoting Pat Buchanan at length, while simultaneously denouncing people like Keith Olbermann.  And the blurring of red and blue continues with the Clintonistas..

by XoFalconXo 2008-03-14 12:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

You have to wonder if these Hillary supporters are real democrats or not.

by Spanky 2008-03-14 12:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

yeah!

makes ya wonder!

damn trolls!

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:11PM | 0 recs
K.O's a liar

He stated he wasn't endorsing Obama in his diatribe against Clinton. If you watch his show, it's all about endorsing Barack.  

by Rome890 2008-03-14 02:44PM | 0 recs
Reverend Wright-- what about that?

Ferraro is our villain?  Not in this lifetime.  You've made a mistake by villainizing Ferraro.   She's been a tireless progressive, and you all chose to tear her down.  Tear down the Clintons, Democrats with a record of fighting Republicans and doing great things for this country.

And now, you have the author of Hope revealed.  And it's Reverend Wright.

The 2 chickens-- race baiting and villainizing of Democrats and especially Democratic women and their allies-- are coming home to roost.

by chieflytrue 2008-03-14 03:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Pat Buchanan?  The same one who said that we should have stayed out of WWII?  WFT is wrong with you?  Since when does MyDD approve of this racist ass?

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I don't know where to start.  Dear Lord, are you aware of what this man has said?  I will never take anything you write seriously again.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I'll struggle on.

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I was not talking to you, but good to know.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 01:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

"He happens to be very lucky to be who he is."

Yeah, all those half-black, fatherless people with African and Islamic names are god damn lucky! Can't get more lucky than that!

(the above is snark)

by LandStander 2008-03-14 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Are they Harvard grads, legacies and spouses too?

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Somehow I don't think Obama's educational background is what was being referred to in those statements. But of course, this is so obvious I feel ridiculous even commenting on it.

by LandStander 2008-03-14 01:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Awesome, hey if I google up some articles from the 1990s, by Pqat, can I get you to recc them, I mean I think we should spread his insight on the Clinton years as well don't you?

by Socraticsilence 2008-03-14 12:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

That sounds like a great idea!

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

don' you know, he's been part of the 20 year plan to elect Hillary.

those Hillary attacks he gave at the Garden in 92, all show biz.

It was all set up for NOW.

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

He used to wirk with her, I guess:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossfire_(TV_series)

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan

So I take it he was telling the truth about all the other shyt he said in years past?

by highgrade 2008-03-14 12:25PM | 0 recs
So if Pat B. said the world was round

He's lying. Why don't we debate the message rather than the messenger.

by Rome890 2008-03-14 12:27PM | 0 recs
Re: So if Pat B. said the world was round

Certainly the issue can be discussed on its merits, as it has been quite frequently on this site.  Bringing this asinine man's column into the argument helps no one.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: So if Pat B. said the world was round

"Debate the message". For god's sake, listen to yourself.

Let's not take into account the extremely long, extremely bad history of Pat Buchanan when he writes an opinion piece about race - this from the man who's entire career has been about furthering the Republican party, to the point of covering up for the worst President we've ever had.

Let's debate "the message".

There is no message. Its good ol' Pat telling us how race works in American politics. The man can't even wrap his mind around women in the military.

At least there's one politician telling you what you want to hear, I guess.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 12:34PM | 0 recs
Re: So if Pat B. said the world was round

"this from the man who's entire career has been about furthering the Republican party, to the point of covering up for the worst President we've ever had"
I recall he was against the Iraq invasion and thought Bush's decision to invade was a disastrous one. Anyway, your argument that his points are invalid because he's pat buchanan, doesn't strengthen your case, but rather, makes you appear as if you're avoiding the subject.

by Rome890 2008-03-14 02:40PM | 0 recs
So everything else he said was wrong

but this one is right.

Does it Occur to you that he is still wrong and you are the one who is a bit lost.

by kindthoughts 2008-03-14 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Folks, we are going to continue to lose this debate time and time again unless we are willing to engage these arguments on the merits and explain why they are wrong.

Everyone has to choose which path to take in life.  And when those impressionable people look at a debate like this, what they see is a guy like Buchanan on one side calmly saying things that sound vaguely accurate to them.  And on the other side, a bunch of people trying to shout that person down and calling him a racist and so forth.

That's how we keep losing these people.  Most of us don't even try to persuade, to make an argument.  We act like we don't even have to dignify it with a response, and that if someone doesn't instantly agree with us, well they're probably racist too.

All these responses so far are simply ad hominems and accusations of racism.  Look, of course Pat Buchanan is a pig.  But if he's so wrong about everything, why is it so hard to prove it?  Make the case, because we're not winning political arguments in the big picture by trying to shout everyone down.

by Steve M 2008-03-14 12:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Steve M, I respect your position, but don't you think it's a bad idea to bring Buchanan into this on the Clinton side?

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Of course no one wants to be on the same side as Pat Buchanan!

The problem is that we've fallen into some very lazy habits in the blogosphere.  There's this list of lying racist wingnut scum who we've decided we simply don't need to dignify with a response, and the list has gotten to be a mile long.  And so every time one of them says something, the blogs become nothing but an echo chamber of "wow, that's offensive!" multiplied by 500.

This is not, you know, Ann Coulter tossing off a bigoted one-liner.  This is a guy making an articulate, cogent argument that many of us see as deeply misguided.  But if we don't explain why it's misguided, if we rely on just grouping in a mob and yelling "racist!" then people on the fence are going to continue to think Pat Buchanan is just expressing some brave truths here.

We want to prove these people wrong.  We don't want to make them martyrs to political correctness.  That's the game we've let them play for way too long.  Bottom line, we are not too good to engage on the merits, even with someone like Pat Buchanan.

by Steve M 2008-03-14 12:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

You make a coherent arguement.  My fear is that all to many Clinton Partisans look for any negative Obama articles from anyone without considering the long term implications.  If they're seen as tacitly supporting his arguments this time, what's to stop people from flipping it on us in the general if Clinton is nominated?  Can't we have this discussion without bringing Pat Buchanan into it?  Let me put it this way: I think that Malkin was right for attacking Google about their stance on China's firewall - but there is no way in hell that I would ever quote her about it.  Leave the racist jackasses in the Republican Party, and out of our primary.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Andrew Sullivaan?

Have you denounced and rejected his commentary too?

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 12:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Well, I wouldn't cite him as a source, that's for sure.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 01:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I agree with you Steve M.

Here is a Clinton supporter (me) criticizing Geraldine Ferraro as harshly as I know how to:

"What she said was true, but she probably shouldn't have said it."

That's a valid criticism of what Ferraro said.  She shouldn't have said it simply because it "draws attention" to the issue of race, sex, etc - which hopefully we should not be so focused on these days in politics.  That being said, the Republicans are going to make the issue of race (if Obama) or gender (if Clinton) come fall.  They are going to do it through surrogates, not through John McCain.  And they are also going to not honor that a black man or a woman should get this far - they are going to strongly suggest that Americans cannot and should not vote for blacks or women.  It is very important that we Democrats understand the difference between what Ferraro said (which was basically benign, but possibly naive of her to point out) and what Republicans are going to say.

by mikes101 2008-03-14 12:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

While I know you're right in your point and your intent, I'm sorry. You say its not Ann Coulter, but Pat has said the exact same type of garbage for the last 30 years. The whole point of his article was to appeal to the people that Ferarro struck a nerve with and ignited their own bias, probably to try and pick up their vote for the Republicans when Obama gets the nomination. Its time the people that still think like this, and defend it for the same reasons Pat does, understand that their outdated attitudes are quickly dying out and with good reason.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 12:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I hear ya, but from where I sit, these arguments have remained remarkably resilient over the last 30 years, largely because liberalism has been intellectually lazy over that period.

by Steve M 2008-03-14 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

It makes good points and is featured at real clear, ignore it, ridicule it, but it is being read by the  villagers.

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 01:02PM | 0 recs
Pat Buchanan is not the way to go

this guys is hate filled.

by kindthoughts 2008-03-14 12:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Its not hard at all to prove him wrong. Just like its not hard to prove him wrong when he says things like this:

""Homosexual groups are attempting to mainstream Satanism," Buchanan wrote in 1990. "Our promiscuous homosexuals appear literally hell-bent on Satanism and suicide."

Between giving Pat the benefit of the doubt that he suddenly has non-vile opinions on anyone that isn't white, male or Christian, and deducting that he's yet again off his rocker appealing to the worst in human nature and everything progressives work against - well, its Occam's Razor.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 12:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

If it's not hard, then take a swing at it.  Don't fall into the trap of believing that just because you and I think he's a crazy extremist, the rest of the world will inevitably follow along.  You and I presumably agree that George Bush is a blithering idiot who has never been right about anything, and he sort of got elected President twice.

by Steve M 2008-03-14 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Sobering point. I will be polishing up my points on this tonight, in time for me to go voter canvassing in PA tomorrow. I hope I won't run into someone I'll have to use them on.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 01:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

What, are we going to line up every wingnut now and discuss their "framed" opinions on their "framed" terms?  
From your posts, I would have to assume that you are calling into the Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly shows to respond to their rants, and try to sway their listeners.  Good luck.

Better to attack these cretins generally and broadly as the  hate-mongers that they are, and give no mind to their specific spin.  

by haystax calhoun 2008-03-14 01:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

All I ask you to realize is that yelling "racist!" has not moved the goalposts very far in our direction over the years.

by Steve M 2008-03-14 01:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Of course we should challenge with well thought out arguements - exhausting though it can be. But sometimes you have to cut your losses. I actually think the democratic boycott of Fox News has been effective. By not legitimizing them they have reduced Fox News to what it is; propaganda for the converted. I believe most people who watch - except for the converted - recognize this.

by thewholeofthemoon 2008-03-14 02:01PM | 0 recs
The Fox boycott

is the perfect example of how not allowing the wingnut media to frame our issues for us has worked in our favor.

by haystax calhoun 2008-03-14 02:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

WOW!  The Rebublican trolls on this board aren't even trying to look like Dems anymore.  

by haystax calhoun 2008-03-14 12:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Hmm, I don't like Pat Buchanan.  But I must agree with him on this article.

Look at all the Obama supporters - all they can say to refute this article is "Geez, you are quoting Pat Buchanan."  I will give them that Pat Buchanan is an SOB.  I do not like him.  I would probably disagree with him on just about everything.

But what is wrong with this article?  He makes valid point after valid point in it.  Ad hominem attacks against the author do not disprove the points of the article, I'm afraid.

by mikes101 2008-03-14 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

The fact you think his arguments are valid - and yes, I did read it, just to make sure it wasn't someone else with the name Pat Buchanan - is a pretty good indication that how you think about your attitudes on race hasn't kept pace with the rest of the United States.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 12:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

>>is a pretty good indication that how you think about your attitudes on race hasn't kept pace with the rest of the United States.

I beg to differ.  I live in Houston Texas which is one of the most racially diverse cities in the entire country.  It is how most of America will look in the year 2050.  Most of my friends are Hispanic, Asian, and other minorities - including blacks.

But now that we are through with the ad hominem attacks against both me, and Pat Buchanan, really - what is wrong with the article?

Are you going to likewise dispute that Romney was strong in Utah in part because of its Mormon population?  Where's the controversy here?  I just don't get it!

by mikes101 2008-03-14 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I know a slew of NGO people who are voting for him precisely because his name is Barack and that he is of color and lived overseas.

They believe it makes him more "authentic" ad "empathic" to others who are not white Americans.

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 12:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

The controversy is that Buchanan and Ferarro are being disingenuous when they say things like this:

"The first campaign this writer ever covered was the New York mayoral race of 1961. Republicans stitched together the legendary ticket of Lefkowitz, Fino and Gilhooley, to touch three ethnic bases. Folks laughed. No one would have professed moral outrage had anyone suggested they were appealing to, or even pandering to, the Jewish, Italian and Irish voters of New York. People were more honest then."

First off, he's bragging that pandering to the racial identity vote - as opposed to putting the best people up for the position - was the purpose of putting together that ticket. Cover the ethnic checkerboard, because Italians vote for Italians and Irish vote for Irish and the Jews vote for the Jews. He says the Republicans were doing this back in 1961, like the Republican party's position on civil rights (among other things) during that time period is something we haven't worked to move this country away from.

He says people didn't get upset because they were more "honest" then. What Pat doesn't realize its not that our society was more honest, its that our society was less progressive. This kind of racial and ethnic pidgeonholing and the political gaming thereof is something that the Republicans have promoted and benefited from for years. And he's trying to pass it off now that Ferarro was just speaking the truth, with the added twist of white guilt thrown into the mix. Of course the black community is voting for him, because he's black - that fits exactly into his worldview. The reason whites are voting for him then must mean that they want the novelty! Black people are cool now, right? Plays right into that "cool black friend" meme that got floated a while back.

That isn't an honest discussion of race in politics. That's a feeble attempt by an old man to justify an increasingly outdated and always disingenuous worldview for political gain for his party.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 01:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

but the kossacks live to say the word "troll".

It's their joy.

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

You, sir, are the troll.  Pat Buchanan.  Sheesh.  You just don't get it.  Tell me, if Obama were the nominee, would you support him in the general?  I know I would support Clinton.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

see, told you so!

yes, I would, Ive voted for sure losers before.

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Well, I'm not a kossak, for whatever that's worth to you.  But you'll at least support Obama in the general, so I take back what I said about you being a troll.  You're still in the wrong about citing Buchanan, though.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 12:58PM | 0 recs
What exactly is your definition of a troll?

Somebody who refuses to take a loyalty oath to support the Democratic pary right or wrong?

Some right wing associates of mine have labeled Demcocrats as socialists/communists/Stalinists sometimes.  I used to scoff at them, but after spending enough time on netroots pages, I understand where they could come up with these labels.

by lombard 2008-03-14 01:06PM | 0 recs
Re: What exactly is your definition of a troll?

If you're not a Democrat, or will not be supporting democrats come the fall, you have no place on this site.  I never said anything about a loyalty oath.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 01:11PM | 0 recs
Wow! Even Red State doesn't go that far.

You hard core netroots types have really gotten full of yourselves.  I guess even though you might not have much power in the real world, throwing your weight around places like this helps to maintain your illusions of grandeur.

by lombard 2008-03-14 01:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow! Even Red State doesn't go that far.

I have no weight here, and few illusions.  If I may: http://www.mydd.com/about.  Hopefully that will clear things up for you.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 01:24PM | 0 recs
We have a different interpretation

Yours appears to be unduly broad and tailored to your own personal resentments.

"Users who are excessively bashing the Democratic Party, or being Republican trolls, will be banned."

OK, let's take the significant parts of this statement"

"excessively bashing the Democratic pary"

What part of that do you not get?  It doesn't say criticizing a policy or candidate choice of a segment of the party or refusing to support a choice on personal principles.

"or being Republican trolls"

Notice the wording does not suggest one should be banned for just being a Republican.  One should also be a "troll."  You believe a troll is one who refuses to fall in line with your thinking.  My view is that a troll is a trouble maker, a harraser, a taunter, or somebody who just seeks to turn a discussion site into a garbage dump.

by lombard 2008-03-14 01:35PM | 0 recs
Re: We have a different interpretation

I can't ban you, I won't TR you, and I'm not forcing you to support the nominee.  Do whatever you want, it's a free country.  I'm just trying to make sure we have a Democrat in the Whitehouse next year.

Fell free to sit out the election or vote for whomever you want.  It's clear that I'm not going to have any effect on what you choose to do.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 01:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

I will also support Obama in the general.  But for now I strongly support Hillary and honestly believe that she is the best candidate to defeat John McCain.

(FWIW - my vote is pretty meaningless since I live in Texas.  I don't hold out hope that either candidate is going to turn Texas blue this year.)

by mikes101 2008-03-14 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

See, this is a good thing.  Support Clinton, support Obama, but above all, support he nominee come fall.

by NewOaklandDem 2008-03-14 01:12PM | 0 recs
enemy telling the Truth but our own afraid!

it is very sad that neither candidate no anybody among democratic leadership is brave enough to say the truth. we have to wait until enemy will tell it and we still not be able to handle the truth. how sad ...

by engels 2008-03-14 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: enemy telling the Truth but our own afraid!

There's a site out there for you on the internet somewhere. Maybe there's a storm front coming in.

by upstate girl 2008-03-14 12:41PM | 0 recs
you said it brother!

by Thomas J Jefferson 2008-03-14 12:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth

Another thing should be mentioned is what if Barack Obama was a NEO CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN like JC Watts/Micheal Steele. Would he been a serious contender for the GOP Nomination.

The thing with Barack Obama is he is the only Black Presidential Candidate that has won statewide office - which Jackson and Sharpton did not accomplish. Obama also does have the scandal baggage that Carol Mosley Braun- who occupied the Senate Seat- Obama held.

We should also remember Al Gore.
Obama had the same experience as Al Gore when Gore first ran for President- in 1988.
Gore first political office was in the US House in 1976- He served 8 years - Then elected to the US Senate in 1984. In 1988 he ran for President- but lost the nomination to Michael Dukakis- who served 6 years as Governor- (no foriegn policy experience). We know rest of the story.

by nkpolitics 2008-03-14 01:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Patrick Buchanan today tells the Truth
Buchanan is obviously enthralled with Hillary... very weird considering that he is a Republican conservative...makes me wonder if Hillary is really as Republican Lite as some people think she is.
I am a white woman nearing 50, one semester away from a B.A. degee, a Democrat for 30+ years, and a devout Liberal. Although, Barack Obama was not my first choice, I voted for him in my state's caucus because my alternative was Hillary Clinton. Hillary may be smart, experienced, etc. but so is Barack. What she should say cuz it is a large part of why she is popular with many voters is that if the phone rings at 3 am, someone with 8 years of Presidential experience will be laying beside her.
My problems with Hillary are that she has spent so much time hanging out with her husband's "enemy" for 6 years-Newt Gingrich; she has reportedly taken mucho dinero from pharmaceutical company lobbyists, thus compromising her ability to follow through on the universal health care the AMA and drug companies do NOT want; and that she has so much political baggage (Whitewater, etc.) that she will be savagely swiftboated if she is the nominee.
I like Barack. I wish he had more federal experience, but he is smart and he will pick a good cabinet (Hillary for Sec. of State?) to advise him. He is not winning because he is playing some kind of race card. As far as I can see, he has been a gentleman and she is fighting dirty and her supporters are bad losers. Obama is intelligent, well educated, dedicated, idealistic, and a great speaker and debator. Hillary is polarizing even amongst her own Party. This is not about race or gender. It is about electablity. Both candidates are qualified, but Barack is the one most likely to beat McCain because he is so popular with diverse groups. We need the support of all Democrats, Independents, and cross over Republicans to beat McCain, esp. with Nader the Traitor running to ruin it for us a 3rd time.
I am tired of hearing about the big states with the most delegates, too. The electoral college should be abolished, esp. since it is why Bu$h "won" the election in 2000 when he lost the popular vote. The popular vote, not the electoral college or super delegates should determine the winner and Hillary should accept the will of the people. If the will of the people doesn't count with her, then why is she running as a Democrat? We do NOT need another 4 years of Cheney/Bush and Hillary needs to stop giving the GOP ammunition to use against the probable nominee. Her own ambition is not the issue here, the Democrats taking back the White House and gaining Congressional seats is the real goal we all need to have.
by Dee9lvs 2008-03-14 01:13PM | 0 recs
Pat Buchanan - Truth Teller

I think Hillary should post that phrase (the one in my subject line) on her site.

by Bob Johnson 2008-03-14 01:20PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads