(I'm still a Black guy, but I'm wearing the Progressive hat right now)
Can some Conservatives tell me where George W. Bush's positions differ from Pat Buchanan's? I have a special interest as regards minorities but I'm asking about all of them, across the board.
Don't tell me where their arguments differ, I'm interested in their net position.
Article comments
1 - RJ
"Can some Conservatives tell me where George W. Bush's positions differ from Pat Buchanan's?"
Immigration, trade, and foreign policy, for starters...
2 - boomcrashbaby
P6, this isn't really relevant to your question, but Mathew Gross, the guy who was instrumental in the Dean Internet fundraising, posted an editorial from his wife, who works with victims of domestic violence. In it, she compares Bush's political and ideological actions to those of the classic abuser.
If you want to understand Bush, it is worth a read.
3 - Eric Olsen
Buchanan is much more anti-abortion than Bush.
Re what RJ said: PB is very anti-immigration, wants sealed borders - Bush is very moderate on immigration; PB is an isolationist on foreign policy where Bush is, um, not; and PB is protectionist on trade where Bush is - apart from the misguided steel tariffs since withdrawn - not.
PB is as paleoconservative as they come, Bush is a combination of mainstream Wall Street Republican, neocon, with some evangenical Christian morality tossed in
4 - Eric Olsen
Let me put it another way: the differences between Bush and Buchanan are greater than the differences between Bush and Kerry.
5 - Natalie Davis
And all three are the same on the issue of legal equality for all Americans, which makes all three unfit to serve.
6 - tom donelson
As having mentioned, Bush believes in Free trade, Buchanan does not. Bush is more pro-immigration whereas Buchanan is not.
Bush believes in spreading freedom beyond our borders, Buchanan's position is not much different than many on the hard left.
Bush has made serious attempts to deal with issues important to minorities including education (Please don't tell me that "Don't Leave Child Behind" has not been properly funded, Bush has spent more education than the previous administration.)
If you are asking this question what is the difference between Buchanan and Bush, it shows that you have very little understanding of modern day conservatism and its evolution.
7 - P6
If you making this response, it shows that you have very little understanding of current events.
But his adminsitration doesn't act that way. That's not exclusive to Bush, but the fact anyone that fees we have free trade going on anywhere in the world is using a definition of free trade coined somewhere in the last four years.
No he hasn't. He's made serious efforts to look that way to his constituents. No minority organization with any constituency at all would agree with you.
Is it enough to fulfill the mandate? All the professionals (and I'm sorry, Bush doesn't qualify) say no.
I just want to see if you guys know how close the two are.
If I had asked how a Buchanan administration would differ from a Bush administration, there would only be immigration…Buchanan lets his xenophobia override the country's need for sub-market cost labor.
8 - RJ
"Mathew Gross, the guy who was instrumental in the Dean Internet fundraising, posted an editorial from his wife, who works with victims of domestic violence. In it, she compares Bush's political and ideological actions to those of the classic abuser."
Oh, yeah, the wife of some guy hardly anyone knows about writes something negative about Bush, essentially psycho-analyzing him from a distance, and this is supposedly credible?
9 - Steve S
I'm guessing you didn't read the article. 90% of it was profiling the Democrats and how they fit the profile of the abused.
In terms of some unknown person on the web psycho-analyzing from a distance, hi kettle.
She isn't saying Bush is a physical abuser (except for Iraq). All she really has to do is profile an abuser and we can use our own intellect to see the parallels ourselves. I found it spot on, in regards to his behavior with reporters, yes men, and his treatment of Democrats/liberals and his belief he is morally superior, etc. The grocery bagger at the supermarket could have told it to me and I would have agreed.
10 - RJ
"The grocery bagger at the supermarket could have told it to me and I would have agreed."
Well, of course. You enjoy having your partisan prejudices confirmed, even by retards and senile old men...
11 - Steve S
what a pesky kettle.
12 - RJ
I'm a retard? Or a senile old man?
13 - Steve S
You enjoy having your partisan prejudices confirmed, even by retards and senile old men..
14 - dwshelf
the fact anyone that feels we have free trade going on anywhere in the world is using a definition of free trade coined somewhere in the last four years.
You are correct P6, we don't have libertarian defined free trade. If we did, the NAFTA would fit on half a page.
But we're massively closer to free trade than Buchannan and Gebhardt would have us. Both share a notion that the consumers of America should be forced by law into a lower standard of living, so as to subsidize an uncompetitive American workforce. Both wouldn't do this in some marginal sense. They would double the cost of everything you buy in an effort to preserve middle class low skill American jobs.
This is a real difference between Bush and Buchannan. As others point out, Buchannan is far closer to being a theocrat.
15 - P6
...if the warlords would let you have paper...
16 - RJ
"...if the warlords would let you have paper..."
???
17 - P6
We've had societies wherein all the requirements of free maket systems were in place.
Like Somalia.