In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
President Bush
GrandWizard
Member Posts: 109 ✭✭
When the U.N. Security Council rejected America's demand for immunity for U.S. soldiers in the Bosnian peace force from arrest and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, the United States vetoed an extension of the force. Either our troops get immunity, or our troops get out.
Good for President Bush.
Once again, when the demands of globalism clashed with the call of patriotism, he put America first. Because he, not Al Gore, is in the Oval Office, America has rejected both the ICC and the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. Even on steel tariffs, where he put his free-trade ideology on the shelf to protect America's steel industry from foreign dumping, Bush exhibited a Reaganite patriotism. And the muted protests suggest that liberals recognize that the patriot card is still the ace of trumps in American politics.
While these presidential decisions produced howls from abroad of "unilateralism" and "isolationism," they are signs of U.S. resolve in the struggle between God-and-country people and the globalists who await the messiah of World Government.
And just as the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional tipped the hand of judicial activists, this U.N. attempt to force U.S. troops under the ICC is welcome. For now, we no longer see as through a glass darkly who the true enemies of American independence are. Their dream is to limit U.S. sovereignty and transfer control of U.S. wealth and power to a global elite that intends to rule the world in the interests not of nations, but of mankind. The institutions of that global regime are already up and operating.
The Security Council is its Senate; the General Assembly its lower house. The Supreme Court is to consist of the World Trade Organization for trade, the ICC for war crimes and the World Court for disputes between nations. The foreign aid dispensers are the African, Asian and Latin American Development banks, and the World Bank. The IMF is its Federal Reserve -- and the model is the European Union.
In the last decade, World Government made mammoth strides, with "Third Way" socialists giving up their national currencies in Europe, the creation of the WTO with the backing of Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole, GOP support of new bailout billions for the IMF and Clinton's signing of America on to the ICC.
But globalist demands have now begun to clash with U.S. vital interests in ways even Republicans can understand. For the Senate to ratify Kyoto would mean a rollback of U.S. fossil fuel emissions to the level of 1990 -- i.e., a depression. And even Democrats realize that the ICC's prosecution of U.S. soldiers for war crimes means the end of the career of any politician who lets that happen.
With immigration, sovereignty is becoming the most explosive issue in Europe, and it is propelling populist parties toward power. So fearful has the European Left become that it now seems hesitant to expand and deepen the EU into an all-powerful regime.
Baroness Margaret Thatcher now concedes that Enoch Powell, whose career was destroyed by his "rivers of blood" speech decrying Third World immigration, was right to have opposed Britain's entry into the EU. She seeks a British withdrawal.
The vehicle the globalists hope to ride is free trade. As the European Coal and Steel Community led to the European Economic Community to the European Community to the European Union today and Euroland tomorrow, they hope NAFTA will lead to a hemispheric free-trade zone, then a global zone with a single currency. Out of this will arise a regime that will slowly expand its power until national sovereignty is ancient history.
The issue may be decided this decade, and we Americans will make the decision. If the price of global trade is a WTO that can impose its will, if the price of the Global Economy is another round of IMF bailouts, if the price of being a world citizen is the surrender of sovereignty and authority to the U.N., will Americans pay it?
What exactly is the price of liberty?
The globalists have a vision of the future, and they will pursue it instinctively and incessantly. The question is: Will patriots not only block this drive to world government, but will they to roll it back? Are they willing to recognize, as Baroness Thatcher has, that we are far down the road to the loss of national independence?
In this struggle, it is an advantage for true conservatives and populists that George W. Bush is not only Andover, Yale, Skull & Bones, Harvard Business and Kennebunkport, he is also Midland-Odessa.
Patrick J. Buchanan
Good for President Bush.
Once again, when the demands of globalism clashed with the call of patriotism, he put America first. Because he, not Al Gore, is in the Oval Office, America has rejected both the ICC and the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. Even on steel tariffs, where he put his free-trade ideology on the shelf to protect America's steel industry from foreign dumping, Bush exhibited a Reaganite patriotism. And the muted protests suggest that liberals recognize that the patriot card is still the ace of trumps in American politics.
While these presidential decisions produced howls from abroad of "unilateralism" and "isolationism," they are signs of U.S. resolve in the struggle between God-and-country people and the globalists who await the messiah of World Government.
And just as the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to declare the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional tipped the hand of judicial activists, this U.N. attempt to force U.S. troops under the ICC is welcome. For now, we no longer see as through a glass darkly who the true enemies of American independence are. Their dream is to limit U.S. sovereignty and transfer control of U.S. wealth and power to a global elite that intends to rule the world in the interests not of nations, but of mankind. The institutions of that global regime are already up and operating.
The Security Council is its Senate; the General Assembly its lower house. The Supreme Court is to consist of the World Trade Organization for trade, the ICC for war crimes and the World Court for disputes between nations. The foreign aid dispensers are the African, Asian and Latin American Development banks, and the World Bank. The IMF is its Federal Reserve -- and the model is the European Union.
In the last decade, World Government made mammoth strides, with "Third Way" socialists giving up their national currencies in Europe, the creation of the WTO with the backing of Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole, GOP support of new bailout billions for the IMF and Clinton's signing of America on to the ICC.
But globalist demands have now begun to clash with U.S. vital interests in ways even Republicans can understand. For the Senate to ratify Kyoto would mean a rollback of U.S. fossil fuel emissions to the level of 1990 -- i.e., a depression. And even Democrats realize that the ICC's prosecution of U.S. soldiers for war crimes means the end of the career of any politician who lets that happen.
With immigration, sovereignty is becoming the most explosive issue in Europe, and it is propelling populist parties toward power. So fearful has the European Left become that it now seems hesitant to expand and deepen the EU into an all-powerful regime.
Baroness Margaret Thatcher now concedes that Enoch Powell, whose career was destroyed by his "rivers of blood" speech decrying Third World immigration, was right to have opposed Britain's entry into the EU. She seeks a British withdrawal.
The vehicle the globalists hope to ride is free trade. As the European Coal and Steel Community led to the European Economic Community to the European Community to the European Union today and Euroland tomorrow, they hope NAFTA will lead to a hemispheric free-trade zone, then a global zone with a single currency. Out of this will arise a regime that will slowly expand its power until national sovereignty is ancient history.
The issue may be decided this decade, and we Americans will make the decision. If the price of global trade is a WTO that can impose its will, if the price of the Global Economy is another round of IMF bailouts, if the price of being a world citizen is the surrender of sovereignty and authority to the U.N., will Americans pay it?
What exactly is the price of liberty?
The globalists have a vision of the future, and they will pursue it instinctively and incessantly. The question is: Will patriots not only block this drive to world government, but will they to roll it back? Are they willing to recognize, as Baroness Thatcher has, that we are far down the road to the loss of national independence?
In this struggle, it is an advantage for true conservatives and populists that George W. Bush is not only Andover, Yale, Skull & Bones, Harvard Business and Kennebunkport, he is also Midland-Odessa.
Patrick J. Buchanan
Comments
Little people talk about people,regular people talk about things,and big people talk about ideas.
I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.--Voltaire~Secret Select Society Of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets~
The way conservative ideology was coupled with rascism is a trick that the left uses often. All conservatives are rascists.In A few scenes in that movie it struck me funny as to how a bunch of rascists would talk about conservative issues, and then in the next breath talk rascist.
If you think illegal immigration is bad-your a rascist skin head.
If you think the LA rioters were criminals-your a rascist skin head.
If you are against affirmitive action-you are a rascist skin head.
That movie was a fine example of Leftist propaganda.
"The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal governmentare few and defined, and will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace negotiation, and foreign commerce"
-James Madison
Little people talk about people,regular people talk about things,and big people talk about ideas.
I heard it on the news, it MUST be true.
Lord Lowrider the LoquaciousMember:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets She was only a fisherman's daughter,But when she saw my rod she reeled.
Little people talk about people,regular people talk about things,and big people talk about ideas.
...yeah,maybe those skin-head idiots aren't conservative afterall,maybe the film-makers took some liberties,but then again maybe we feel nervous about those "aryian club members" because they might be too close for comfort for alot of us...well,maybe ultra conservative ideals anyway...
Skin heads are not conservative-they are racists. Conservative or constitutional ideology has nothing to do with rascism.
With your "ultra-conservative" remark, it seems apparent that you have swallowed the propoganda that the left/media/hollywood dishes out with respect to "extreme right wingism". Racism IS NOT an extreme right ideology.The media just associates racism with the right wing.
You might feel "nervous" because there ideology is "to close for comfort" for you,but I feel very comfortable with my "ultra conservatism", and can not find a connection with racism and conservative thought(at least, outside of the Hollywood/media definition).
Just curious as to why you are so sure this movie was an "accurate" representation of skin heads. What do you base this assumption on?
I have seen a few documentaries on the skin head phenomenenon, and I have never heard any actual skin heads speak in a conservative manner-it is all about hate. One I remember is "blood in the face" and none of the real rhetoric the skins were spewing even remotely resembled conservative ideals.
That movie you praise definately left the impression that if you
Thought rioters were criminals,
Thought affirmitive action was wrong,
Thought that stopping illegal immigration was wron, then you were one step away from shaving your head and curbing some black man on the street.
"The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal governmentare few and defined, and will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace negotiation, and foreign commerce"
-James Madison
Little people talk about people,regular people talk about things,and big people talk about ideas.
Fitz
Check out the movie "Blood in the face". A real life documentary about white supremacists and their ilk. When you hear their rhetoric, it is quite clear that their beliefs are not tied to conservative thought. Sure they love affirmative action, but their love for affirmative action is not because it goes against the principles of equality, but because they just hate blacks.
"The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal governmentare few and defined, and will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace negotiation, and foreign commerce"
-James Madison
I've followed your posts, but refrained from comment until now. I think it goes without saying that your name incites strong feelings without you even having to make a statement. I don't know whether that's bad or good. It's just true.
As to your post (and the others) above, I have some thoughts... All great leaders that I'm aware of had ideas that were put forth in such a way as to be in agreement with the needs of the population in general. Napolean, Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro, and so many others.
If we were to look just at Hitler, it would be unjustified to say that he had no good ideas, nor that some of his actions weren't for the betterment of Germany and Austria. The problem was that once someone agreed with Hitler and became a follower, then the other ideology began to filter in. After all... A few Jews, some gypsies, and who could possible care about less than perfect infants?
I'm what might be called a constitutional right-winger. I absolutely agree with the neo-nazi blowhards about the necessity of closing our boarders to illegals. I'm sure there are other points of agreement too, but I don't support their filthy ilk and I never could. The same holds true for the KKK. God and country are wonderful ideas that I fully support and agree with. Twisted ideas about religion and skin color are disgusting.
I'll agree with you on certain points, but I fear the agreement comes from entirely different thought processes. The Klan is rooted in twisted logic and hides behind a screen of patriotism and religion. The ideals espoused by such as yourself (assuming there is a Klan association), are not founded firmly on truth. There is just enough of it to sway a few minds, but there's not enough to sway me.
I hope I speak for the majority when I say that even in agreement I'll remain the enemy of the Klan and any other hate-based organization. As someone previous to me said, the devil has been most successful when he's been able to make us believe he isn't.
While I respectfully agree with some of your comments, I remain opposed to your ideals. There's always that underlying chord of hate and the forlorn wish to be superior.
Nord
I am in favor of the death penalty,but not abortion,
I'm all for womens rights, as long as My supper is not late,
I'm all for affirmitive action, unless it takes My job,
I'm against illegal immigrants, except the ones that work for Me,
I hate Blacks, but I love Colin Powell,
I hate Mexicans, except the ones that help raise My kids,
I hate welfare,but I like crop subsidy,
I hate foreign imports but love My Toyota truck,
I hate the Democraps, but I vote the way the Union tells Me,
So You see Mr.Wizard, You must become more centered with your thinking and change your name to respect the views of the folks on this board.
May I suggest"Grand Chameleon"?
Clouder..