← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · JoseyWales
Thread ID: 13261 | Posts: 22 | Started: 2004-04-21
2004-04-21 00:49 | User Profile
Ive seen a few quips about how "lincoln preserved the union" in his writings.
2004-04-21 00:56 | User Profile
Pat has a interesting amalgam of ideas.
He thinks we shouldn't have fought in WWII but thinks that VietNam was worth it.
Still and all I like him.
His "Death of the West" was a great boon to our side.
2004-04-21 00:59 | User Profile
Who cares? The South should have led the charge to boot the Mex-skins, since they're the ones flooded by them.
Noooop. They don't care. Ergo, I don't care about them. They dance and prance like tough guys (Jim Giles coughcough*), but I see them innundated with illegals. I expected more, but alas: Northerners couldn't POSSIBLY offer less resistance than these "patriots"
-Jay
2004-04-21 01:21 | User Profile
I too bought his book "death of the west", and agree it was a good thing to "our" side. im not 100% sure i agree with ol pat though on everything, like some of you. overall, i damn sure would have had him as prez rather than g-dumbya.
fact is though, sad as it is, Pat is not electable. why ? because there is no "we" of significant size to put him in office. add up all the non-whites, lesbians, homos, communists, socialists, etc... and "we" are indeed an outcast minority, no need to wait for 2050. the repuclicans have sold out to the fudge-packers and the global industries in the name of profits.
2004-04-21 01:31 | User Profile
Feric Jaggar - your sig line is oh-so-relavant, although i prefer the older translation (KJV)
2004-04-21 01:38 | User Profile
sdfsdf
2004-04-21 01:51 | User Profile
That's right, Jay, no one is the South cares about illegals. That's why 80% of Southern Republicans oppose Bush's plans for aliens and want decreased immigration, and that's why they regularly let their Congressmen and the GOP hierarchy know about their views.
You are completely out of touch with political reality. Most Southerners are only recently becoming aware of the mass nature of the Latino invasion. It takes time for their feelings to penetrate the GOP hierarchy, and obviously little is going to come of it so long as Bush in charge. For you, I suppose this means the whole white race is doomed in America. In fact, Bush's defear will likely pave the way for an anti-immigration GOP, and Southern racialism (however it is disguised) will have played a large role there.
[QUOTE=jay]Who cares? The South should have led the charge to boot the Mex-skins, since they're the ones flooded by them.
Noooop. They don't care. Ergo, I don't care about them. They dance and prance like tough guys (Jim Giles coughcough*), but I see them innundated with illegals. I expected more, but alas: Northerners couldn't POSSIBLY offer less resistance than these "patriots"
-Jay[/QUOTE]
2004-04-21 02:22 | User Profile
[QUOTE=darkstar]That's right, Jay, no one is the South cares about illegals.[/QUOTE]
Oh, i'm sure they care. On some level. Kinda the way voters care about government spending.
[QUOTE]That's why 80% of Southern Republicans oppose Bush's plans for aliens and want decreased immigration, and that's why they regularly let their Congressmen and the GOP hierarchy know about their views. [/QUOTE]
Um....yeah ok. Whatever. They let them know - but keep voting GOP. That really makes the GOP work hard for their vote! LAMO
[QUOTE]You are completely out of touch with political reality. [/QUOTE]
Southern Whites=voters=GOP=more immigration. That's reality, sir.
[QUOTE]Most Southerners are only recently becoming aware of the mass nature of the Latino invasion. [/QUOTE]
Do they sleep 23 hours per day? Come on.
[QUOTE]It takes time for their feelings to penetrate the GOP hierarchy, and obviously little is going to come of it so long as Bush in charge.[/QUOTE]
Didn't take me any time.
[QUOTE]For you, I suppose this means the whole white race is doomed in America. [/QUOTE]
I fear that may be the case. Bothers me every day. Until I see any evidence to the contrary, I'll assume the worst.
[QUOTE]In fact, Bush's defear will likely pave the way for an anti-immigration GOP, and Southern racialism (however it is disguised) will have played a large role there.[/QUOTE]
PHOOEY! The only region he will win in a landslide will the the South. Again. they'll put him back in the White House, where he can pay the South back with more immigration.
-Jay
2004-04-21 02:37 | User Profile
jay makes some good points, g-dumbya has many Southerners fooled
2004-04-21 02:49 | User Profile
You suggest that because the South will support Bush--over Kerry?--their concerns about immigration will not be heard if Bush loses. That might make sense, if only we weren't talking about politics. You don't seem to understand that it is not a question of where Bush will win, but of the number of white voters he draws to the polls. If the GOP sees that he is not inspiring the rank-and-file--and at present, he isn't, they just hate the Dems and liberals--than in the future they will take steps to put out a more populist message. In fact, they would be putting out a more populist message on immigration right now, if Bush hadn't shot himself in the foot on it already.
I'm glad you figure out immigration was a problem. But it is a mistake to project the though processes of concerned citizens on to the herd. They are sleeping dragon, and they move slowly. Likewise, what the GOP says today will bear no relation to what it says tomorrow. (Though I would suggest voting LP whenever the candidate is in favor of border controls).
[QUOTE=jay]Oh, i'm sure they care. On some level. Kinda the way voters care about government spending.
Um....yeah ok. Whatever. They let them know - but keep voting GOP. That really makes the GOP work hard for their vote! LAMO
Southern Whites=voters=GOP=more immigration. That's reality, sir.
Do they sleep 23 hours per day? Come on.
Didn't take me any time.
I fear that may be the case. Bothers me every day. Until I see any evidence to the contrary, I'll assume the worst.
PHOOEY! The only region he will win in a landslide will the the South. Again. they'll put him back in the White House, where he can pay the South back with more immigration.
-Jay[/QUOTE]
2004-04-21 04:23 | User Profile
Recieved a National Republicking survey marked urgent.. NOT ONE, NOT ONE question about the anti white, NON white invasion! They did ask for money, and one of the survery questions was do you approve of bombing where ever we tell you bad guys are? Or course they used the all purpose T word..
2004-04-21 18:15 | User Profile
The National GOP Leadership is more or less identical with the Bush administration. Of course they don't mention anti-immigration measures. Neither will too many other official GOP publications--the Fuehrerprinzip running strong in the GOP.
However, the California state GOP convention was full of anti-immigration speakers. Regularly meeting conservative organizations likewise are full of people who disagree strongly with Bush's plans on spending and immigration. True, they always play the 'lesser of two evils' card, and end up claiming they will vote for Bush. And this is quite an evil and stupid attitude. But the fact remains that there is little keeping the GOP from adopting a populist message on immigration besides Bush. The other pro-immigration GOP types--the Judeo-Evangelicals and certain big business groups--are vastly outnumbered in party.
I am not claiming that the GOP deserves support, but I am suggesting that there is little reason to believe it will remain silent on the immigration problem in the future.
[QUOTE=Smedley Butler]Recieved a National Republicking survey marked urgent.. NOT ONE, NOT ONE question about the anti white, NON white invasion! They did ask for money, and one of the survery questions was do you approve of bombing where ever we tell you bad guys are? Or course they used the all purpose T word..[/QUOTE]
2004-04-21 18:34 | User Profile
I think the issue of the Confederacy may have more staying power that is suggested. No, actual secession of the Southen states is not in the cards, but Southerners can come to see racial and economic injustice of contemporary American federalism by exploration of Southern and Confederate identities.
Of course, such Southerners will be attacked by some other conservatives, who will in turn have ideas that will be savaged by true Southerners. But it is not clear that this kind of discord has to be all that damaging. The main problem is when you get groups like the Claremont Institute who make Lincoln almost the central issue in conservatism, or when Southerers actually start to believe their rhetoric that their cause is detached from isssues of race. Things must not get of hand in this way. Otherwise, though, North vs. South conflict shows that the Right is healthy enough to tolerate disagreement and in-fighting.
In general, it is fine for the Right to be a broad tent, just so long as the pro-welfare-spending, pro-3rd-world-immigration types have to stand by the door.
[QUOTE=AntiYuppie]Buchanan's mutually contradictory stances on Confederacy reflect the fact that "paleoconservatism" is in many ways an amalgam of mutually incompatible positions that are held together through an alliance against common enemies (the PC Left and the neocons), and the different factions are forced to pay lip-service to one another's pet issues out of expediency. Buchanan's courting of "Neo-Confederatism" seems to be along these lines.
In his economic views, Buchanan is very much an old-school Republican (like Lincoln). He championed a protective tariff which in many ways was what sparked the push for Confederate independence to begin with (i.e. the north wanted a tariff to protect its industries from being undersold by European competitors, the south wanted to buy goods from the cheapest source), placing himself ideologically in the Federalist camp alongside Clay and Lincoln and opposite Calhoun and Davis.
I will add, however, that in many ways Federalism was historically the conservative position (Hamilton and later Clay were accused of being "Monarchists without a monarch") while most of the social radicals of the time gravitated towards anti-Federalist Confederacy.
Regardless, "Neo-Confederatism" is such a lost cause that I see no reason to worry about what Buchanan (or anybody else) thinks about it. The relevant divisions today are not north and south or Federalist vs. Confederate, but rather racial, socioeconomic, and to some extent cultural along the urban/rural divide. Dwelling on old Civil War enmities simply muddies the waters by setting potential allies against one another and by placing people who ought to be political foes into the same camp.[/QUOTE]
2004-04-24 03:16 | User Profile
is Pat Buchanan any friend of the South ?
:saddam:
The short answer is NO. He is not a Southern Nationalist, he is a Scalawag, Re-Constructed, Quisling, neo-confederate, Amerikan Nationalist, and Egalitarian BlackRepublican to boot--remember his choice of a negress as Veep???
Yes, he made some good points in Death of the West, and takes the form of the Traditional South, but it really is form without substance! He does not make the connection between White Rule and and everything that is worthwhile about Western Civilization. And, he lumps US all in with the amerikans, the assimilated 'melting pot' the Yankees are so fond of, the end result which OUR ancestors clearly forsaw was Amalgamation, the TAN MAN, and the death of OUR People.
The South has a distinct Ethno-Culture, different from the Yankees and Europeans, our kissin' cousins. WE have been different from them since Jamestowne and Plymoth Rock, from Royalist Cavalier and New England Roundhead, from Plantation and TownHall, from Confederacy to Union, yellow-dog Democrat and BlackRepublican, Agrarian and Factory, Immigrant and Emigrant, Bible Belt and Rust Belt, etc., etc.
OUR enemies are still the Negro, Scalawag and Carpetbagger, though most of OUR Folk are asleep/blinded by the god of this world. WE, the Remnant who do not bow the knee to Baal in Dixie, know the difference.
Anybody, like Buchannon or El Presidente Bush, who thinks it best the the Southern Confederacy lost the War of Yankee Aggression, is NO friend of the South!
:gunsmilie
2004-04-26 11:28 | User Profile
[url]http://www.theamericancause.org/pathatedixie.htm[/url] Yes.
2004-04-26 13:45 | User Profile
:saddam:
2004-04-26 16:25 | User Profile
[url]http://www.amren.com/foster_vp.htm[/url] Interesting. I don't think Buchanan thought for a second this woman would ever be VP, and maybe President. He did that to rattle some cages, not make some deep statement. So, it didn't upset me that much. [url]http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/election/july-dec00/buchanan_9-12.html[/url] Look what we got, Colin Powell, that scrawny conwoman Rice, and Rumsfield, Cheney, GW Bush. Yeah, that's a team reall good for the south (sarcasm)
2004-04-26 16:48 | User Profile
I'll take one Ezola Foster over 10 "Heritage, not Hate"-type Southern Party leaders.
2004-05-02 22:24 | User Profile
To read our stance on the issues click below:
* Affirmative Action
Affirmative Action
Position:
Of all the needs of this nation, few are greater for our peace and happiness than racial reconciliation. But we do not alter the evil character of racial discrimination by simply changing the color of the beneficiary. No government in this Land of the Free has the moral or constitutional right to discriminate on the basis of color, and all government-sponsored prejudice - no matter how benign its purpose-belongs in the same graveyard as Jim Crow. Instead of patronizing minorities by presuming they cannot succeed without government assistance, we must work together to bridge our racial divide and rediscover what brings us together as one nation and one people.
[url]http://www.theamericancause.org/issues.htm[/url]
[B]...IF THAT'S WHAT Y'ALL WANT...[/B]
:afro:
2004-05-02 23:33 | User Profile
CC: You'll be holding your breath for a long time if you expect the world to agree with you on every issue. Pat would eliminate AA programs, so what's you're beef...that he doesn't call them porch monkeys?
2004-05-03 00:54 | User Profile
Setting up a negress as veep--that is the worst. Race matters, and wanting to set her over us is as disgusting as it gets--exactly what the 'rainbow neo-confederates' so-called southern leadership has been pushing with their HK nonsense and 'black confederate' MTYH. I reject the negro, he has no place in any South I want anything to do with! Also, is an Amerikan First, and only belatedly a Southerner. He's wrong on his history--Lincoln and FedGov have been our problem, and subsequent 'Southern Redemption' and rejoining the Yankee Empire in return for White Rule in Dixie merely brought about another betrayal by FedGov in the 40s, and being wrong about all our problems stemming from this century's communist infiltration of our institutions. Slavery and Segregation are Southern History for 400 years, and ended only by FedGov bayonets, like his hero Ike sent to Little Rock. The problem IS the USA, and mixing the races like Buchanan does is NOT the solution...
:nerd:
2004-05-03 01:34 | User Profile
I had no idea, nor remember the idea of a negress VP, that is one ticket that i could never vote for. I dont any negroes in any gvt position above dog catcher.