75 votes

Pat Buchanan: Bill Kristol Brags About Purging Ron Paul Types From GOP

Trotskyite Kristol brags about neocons expelling the Buchanan/Ron Paul types and even does some revisionist history on PJB third party run in 2000 (a campaign I was a part of)

“At B’nai Jeshurun,” writes Weiss, “Kristol admitted to playing a role in expelling members of the Republican Party he does not agree with.” These are Republicans you had to “repudiate,” said Kristol, people “of whom I disapprove so much that I won’t appear with them.”

“I’ve encouraged that they be expelled or not welcomed into the Republican Party. I’d be happy if Ron Paul left. I was very happy when Pat Buchanan was allowed — really encouraged … by George Bush … to go off and run as a third-party candidate.”

http://buchanan.org/blog/how-bill-kristol-purged-the-arabist...




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I applaud Kristol.

buchanan and paul and others should go 3rd party. too bad kristol has very little control over gop, otherwise there would be a thriving 3rd party if gop would kick paul out. but of course, corrupt gop wants to keep paul so he doesn't form anything on his won, but sticks under them and not accomplishing nothing as they subdue him because they can as he is under their as a formal republican.

jj

the battle for the heart and

the battle for the heart and soul of GOP lies between two factions: those in it for the social club with USA cupcakes and all, and those are in it for ideas. Like stuck up "popular kids" at high school, those in it for the social club are doing whatever it takes to keep the status quo intact.

Kristol is a vile piece of excrement

who should be given an M 16 and sent into the mountains of Afghanistan or the border with Iran. As a matter of fact there's at least 500 individuals I can think of as candidates for this instead of young naive kids.

If not us than who?

I seriously don't know that Bill Kristol

is even a human. When I see him, he looks like a demon to me.

Kristol the block commissar

Bill Kristol gets along with the media liberals much better than he gets along with conservatives like Ron Paul or Pat Buchanan. Kristol thinks that the Likud party and the Republican party should be one and the same -- that he has succeeded to the extent that he has says a lot about the average Republican lemming. When presented with the choice of a Ron Paul or a Pat Buchanan, Republican voters opted for John McCain and George W. Bush. Kristol and his MSM cohorts are laughing all the way to the next round of "shock and awe".

I have a bucket list

It's not your typical bucket list though. Mine is people who's graves I'm going to piss on when they're dead. Bill Krystol has been on the top of my list since 1996. I can't wait for that D-bag to die.

Live Free or Die Trying

well said...

Don't take this the wrong way... but i would gladly join that party.

Bill Kristol

Bill Kristol is an evil man... and should be tarred and feathered at the least. Actually, hanging for high treason would be more fitting for his role in instigating and fomenting for special interests the slaughter fest in Iraq.

Pat

Is awesome, yet it is ashame that he is letting his differences concerning tariffs get in the way of endorsing Ron Paul.

Trade without Tariffs, Suicide

Can you have a house without walls?

Tariffs are the walls and ceiling which help sustain the economy.

No tariffs means your house has no walls and roof. And corporations take away your furniture, your property, your wife.

Use your brain. Don't drink MSM kool-aid.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

Trade without Tariffs = Suicide?

Is this a joke? Or am I missing something.

You are missing commonsense and logic

Commonsense and experience is better than BS ideology. Try commonsense once in a while. You will like it.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

lol

Ok, guy. I'm going to assume you intended to post on the Obamney website and somehow got lost. But just in case you intentionally posted here, I would recommend you study a bit of Austrian economics before you insult other people's lack of common sense. After all, YOU may like it. Perhaps start with Road to Serfdom written by Hayek. Otherwise, I would say "good day to you, sir."

Pompous?

Austrian economics is based on commonsense. I read hayek, Rothbard the whole works. That's why I am telling you to use commonsense.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

I agree with

your statement about Austrian economics. I simply fail to see the logic of how government intervention in the economy in the form of tariffs (subsidies) fosters a strong market economy. As for the pompous accusation, I was just responding to your notion that anyone who is opposed to tariffs is a brainless mule absent common sense.

P.S. when I asked if it was a joke I was seriously asking, not trying to start a fight. I really thought it was sarcasm and I was missing something.

Brainfree?

Tariffs are not subsidies.

Subsidy props up domestic manufacturers against foreign by largesse, by blocking entry.

Subsidy would prevent Toyota entering US to compete with Ford.

Tariffs allow Toyota to bring technology, money, know-how to build factories in America to compete with Ford. Tariffs prevent Toyota dumping products in America.

Tariffs boost competition and free markets, prevent dumping.

Learn free trade. Do not masquerade like a know all when you dont know anything.

Tariffs boost free trade. Subsidies destroy free trade. learn free trade.

Tariffs also help pay for national defense. Jefferson, Adams, Jackson, all supported tariffs and opposed subsidies.

Hamilton supported subsidies.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

I do not claim

to be a know-it-all. But to "not know anything"? A little demeaning. Anyway, does it not sound paradoxical to you to use the words "tariff" and "free trade" in the same sentence? After all, tariffs have been the means of trade WARS for centuries, and in several cases, have actually led to real wars. Free trade, to me at least, implies unobstructed exchange. i.e. free association.

To your point that tariffs are not subsidies, I would suggest otherwise. Tariffs are merely a form of subsidy on the international scale as opposed the national scale. If Ford cannot compete with toyota without assistance, why would those resources not be better used in an industry sector that America can be more competitive at without special help from the State.

This benefits consumers as well, as the consumers get good quality cars for cheap, and the economy is stronger when those resources are being used more efficiently.

Read slowly

Read my above post slowly again, several times. It answers your confusion.

Your history is all wrong and fraudulent. Tariffs largely kept America out of wars till WWI (except 1898 Spanish war which was started by NY Times MSM false flag deception).

On the other hand British Empire practiced tariff free trade and it was fighting wars and imposing imperialism and subsidies all over the world on China, India (my great grandfather was harassed and looted by British).

So you are completely ignorant and its pointless to debate when you type bald faced lies.

Tariffs boost free enterprise, free trade. They prevent arbitrage which is the cancer infecting free trade.

Please be honest.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

OK

You are too clever for me. I'm a big liar and I've been caught.

Losing the Debate

When you are unable to defend yourself intellectually with commonsense, empiricism, facts, then you start insulting me.

I repeat. learn free trade.

Tariffs are the only way towards free trade. Tariff free trade imposes arbitrage imperialism.

Tariffs eliminate the need for income tax, excise tax, sales tax.

Tariffs and user fees fund national defense.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

Kumar is a Troll

Read Frederic Bastiat Mr. Free Market

Candle makers should block out the Sun : http://www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basSoph3.html

Tariffs are nothing but a Tax, if they really promote free trade then why not make the tariffs %1000 and we'll all have a merry Christmas.

Hell, nobody will ever have to work again for the economy will be more efficient than ever.....common sense, right?

"we must admit that our opponents in this argument have a marked advantage over us. They need only a few words to set forth a half-truth; whereas, in order to show that it is a half-truth, we have to resort to long and arid dissertations.

This situation is due to the nature of things. Protection concentrates at a single point the good that it does, while the harm that it inflicts is diffused over a wide area. The good is apparent to the outer eye; the harm reveals itself only to the inner eye of the mind. In the case of free trade, it is just the reverse. " ~ Bastiat

1000% Tariffs?

When you cannot defend yourself you insult me and demagogue the debate.

Tariffs stop arbitrage.

Tariffs allow Toyota and Ford to compete on level field. Ford will sink or swim. Tariffs promote free trade, competition, liberty.

Tariffs help to abolish every form of taxation except user fee (like highway toll booths).

I pity your demagogy.

Bastiat's candle rhetoric is based on commonsense. At night you needed candle, not during day. It was a natural argument.

This means Ford (the candle maker) would ask federal govt to block Toyota (Sun) from starting a factory. That is a protective tariff.

But general tariffs allow Toyota to bring $, Technology, and make factories here.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

So tariffs forced upon all by

So tariffs forced upon all by the government are free trade, nice to know.
It's really "free" if somebody else is forced to pay for your products so they can compete on the market.

That's pure corporatism, because you only think about the corporations that then can "compete", but what about the people who have to pay higher prices?

Imagine what would happen if you tariff all imported products in a small county by a high percentage. Soon, nobody would be selling his products to this county, anymore. They would have to produce everything on their own.

You are a Marxist?

You are proposing trade without tariffs which is arbitrage trade, not free trade at all.

Marx supported free trade without tariffs. Here is what he said more than 100 years ago:

...the Free Trade system works destructively. It breaks up old nationalities and carries antagonism of proletariat and bourgeoisie to the uttermost point…the Free trade system hastens the Social Revolution. In this revolutionary sense alone...I am in favor of Free Trade...

Founders knew better. They supported general tariffs to pay for defense, foreign affairs, treasury, and justice, the 4 constitutional departments.

Some force is necessary to protect life, liberty and property. National Defense, local police, tariffs are those things.

You are confused about corporatism. Corporatism is big business in bed with big government for favors.

So Ford in Bed with Obama against Toyota is corporatism.

But under general tariffs, both ford and toyota play on level field under the same rules with no tax payer largesse and no govt favoritism.

And you are falsely confusing higher prices with tariff. Higher prices are due to malinvestment, fiat money, poor management, old technology, etc.

Not due to tariffs. Tariffs are the simplest and most humane way to fund constitutional govt.

Your small county question is unconstitutional and therefore invalid, since the constitution prohibits tariffs "between States" or "between counties" under interstate commerce clause.

Since all 50 States are part of central govt with common constitution, they do not need tariffs. Does China and US have common constitution?

A tariff free trade between China and US is possible only if they are under one government with same rules and open borders like UN or Kissinger type NWO. In fact tariff free trade is what NWO tyrants want.

From your posts its looks like you are a NWO plant who wants to destroy America with open borders and tariff free trade and force world govt on us. I suspect you are an evil doer.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

Tariffs are not free market.

You work from the assumption that government must intervene to create a free market but the free market exists whether the government is there or not.

The fact whether or not Tariffs are the best way to fund government is immaterial. It is a simple fact that Tariffs are NOT free market.

You distinguish between a "general" tariff and a "protective" tariff but you contradict yourself in explaining that you need a tariff to protect America from Toyota dumping cheap products on us (how horrible). Who cares if Toyota dumps their products, if people buy them, they buy them if they don't they don't....THAT is free market.

Tariffs are an intervention and are not a necessity for a market to function.

brainfree?

I did not assume govt intervention. You did. Govt does not dole out tax payer money or regulatory favor to either ford or toyota or both.Or block entry of a new player. Under general tariffs All japanese, koreans, germans, etc are welcome to compete in US with Americans with zero corporate tax, 0 income tax, 0 sales tax etc.

So tariffs are not govt intervention. Your accusation would be valid if tariffs were designed to artificially prop up GM, Chrysler, etc, to compete against Honda, which would make them subsidies or protective tariffs, not general tariffs.

There is no tariff between 50 States because constitution organizes all 50 States under federal govt.

If China and US were under single govt with common constitution, then yes I would agree to tariff free trade with China.

If all nations were under world govt with world army and world constitution, then yes tariff free world trade makes sense because then there is no arbitrage.

"Who cares if Toyota dumps their products". - The answer to that is simple. You need single set of laws, rules, regulations under single national govt governing both Japan and US.

Without that, free trade is like one side playing judo and other side playing football with other other. The contest would turn into a circus.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

Taking arguments

to their logical conclusion is not demagoguery, it is a litmus test to judge the merit of an argument.

Pity YOURSELF fool.

When

I originally commented on Pat and tariffs, I did not mean to have an ugly argument over the merits of tariffs, but was commenting on what I regarded as unfortunate, that someone as good as Pat is seemingly letting an issue that pails in comparison to the other issues facing us consume his thinking too much, aside from this recent article. Let's not do the same here. My own take on tariffs is that, like the Federalist Papers said, they are less dangerous to liberty than an excise tax. Yet when overtly protectionist, they can be dangerous to freedom.

Tariffs boost free trade, Subsidies are protectionist

You are closer to the truth than atticus.

BestRonPaulVideo, Totalitarianism http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M#t=28m28s
BestVideo, Political Correctness http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz8pzG02oxU#t=19s
Bestbook, Totalitarianism, http://www.amazon.com/dp/0759672229

I am

Thinking about it. Ron Paul=No UN, no massive spending, free trade, peace

Romney=Massive spending, UN, constant overseas involvement,tariffs, possibly pro Roe V Wade, he has made no promises to appoint justices that will overturn this power grab that legalized murder, an issue that should be left up to the states either way.

Who is the logical choice for someone like Pat? The only thing Romney and Pat agree on are tariffs and any gain in the US manufactoring is outweighed by massive spending.