Blog powered by Typepad

April 2005

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

« NEOCONS "TURN" ON "THE HERO IN ERROR" CHALABI | Main | CATHOLIC U'S CLAES RYN SPELLS IT OUT FOR YOU »

May 04, 2004

Comments

Anonymous

But Buchanan is an anti-semite. If Britain and the US had done as he has said they should, i.e., let Germany rule Europe, then nearly every Jew in Europe would have been killed. If supporting a policy that would have resulted in successful genocide isn't anti-semitism, then I don't know what is.

Al, you're far more interesting when your talking about Monarchy, mixed government, distributism, and Franco (or would be; I've never seen you comment on him) than when you obsess over those awful neo-cons and follow an anti-semitic, isolationist nut like Buchanan.

al

Anon,
I know Pat Buchanan, and I don't believe he's antiSemetic. But if you'll read Claes Ryn's article posted above, you'll find that talking about the neocons, and talking about Monarchy, mixed govt. and distributism are really just two sides of the same coin.

Aquinas Admirer

al,

You have the privileged position of personally knowing Pat Buchannan, few Americans do. For the rest of us, who simply learn about what he thinks from his writings and television appearances, anti-semitism is an easy conclusion to make.

c matt

I, like most other Americans, only know PB from his writings. I keep hearing this anti-semitic claim against him, but the closest I can detect is his positions that: (1) we don't owe Israel anything (2) we should not fight their battles for them without identifying a specific national interest for us and (3) Israel has been less than the greatest ally for us. Granted, it may not seem charitable, but how, exactly is that anti-semitic? Can you point me to some other position he has held that is clearly anti-semitic?

The comments to this entry are closed.