Author Topic: Pat buchanan (Read 1962 times)

tradlover · « **on:** April 05, 2011, 03:45:26 PM »

I heard that Pat Buchanan is a trad. What do you think about him?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #1 on:** April 05, 2011, 04:13:40 PM »

I saw him on a show around the turn of the year and he selected Palin as his "person of the year." IMO, that shows he is slipping. I have noticed inconsistencies in his ideas over the years, but PALIN??!?!!! Yikes!

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #2 on:** April 05, 2011, 04:16:09 PM »

Selecting a career woman as "person of the year" isn't a good idea. It only helps increase the career woman movement.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #3 on:** April 05, 2011, 04:24:22 PM »

Palin is a complete bimbo...a true whore of the Banksters/Israel...

Oremus · « **Reply #4 on:** April 06, 2011, 10:27:03 PM »

He attends the diocesan TLM at St. Mary's in DC. I've bumped into him (literally) twice.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #5 on:** April 06, 2011, 10:33:28 PM »

Quote from: Oremus

He attends the diocesan TLM at St. Mary's in DC. I've bumped into him (literally) twice.

If you see him again, tell him to get his head out of his ass. Palin is worse than worthless, yet he holds her in high esteem.

I went to hear him speak ten-plus years ago. Afterward, when speaking with him, it was clear he thought JP2 was the bee's knees. He has actually used the moniker JP the GREAT to describe the diabolical Polish Destroyer! HeL-Lo-O, McDufus!!!

Raoul76 · « **Reply #6 on:** April 06, 2011, 11:46:15 PM »

gladius_veritatis said:

Quote

He has actually used the moniker JP the GREAT to describe the diabolical Polish Destroyer!

You mean Destroyer of the Polish, since so many of them became sob sisters of the Jєωs and went along with all the liberalisms of VII because they were so proud to have a Polish Pope. I am convinced this was intended by Satan. The Poles in one century have gone from a people who were extremely anti-communist and wary of Jєωs, to licking Jєωιѕн feet.

I will say, the Poles have always had a tendency to liberalism that was worrisome. I know very little about their history but they seem to have perpetually toggled between proto-American ideals of religious liberty and strict Catholicism. My personal life trajectory, being very liberal and then shifting suddenly into zealous Inquisitor-like Catholic idealism, seems to be very Polish in this way. But JPII helped to bring out the latent liberalism, romantic sensuality, and masochistic sentimentality in the Polish character, and it doesn't appear to be going away. The Old Catholics are another bad sign for the Poles of today, many of them are Polish and they are pro-condom and pro-female-priests. They Old Catholic movement from the beginning was all about making the Church into a democracy.

But Wojtyla is most likely a Jєωιѕн wolf in Polish clothing, with a mother whose name, allegedly, is a Polnicized ( is that a word? ) version of Katz. That isn't proven but it makes a lot of sense.

Another rumor is that Pius X was half-Polish and, well, take a look at him -- does he look 100% Italian to anybody?

From the Daily Catholic:

Quote

"He was born Giuseppe (Joseph) Melchiorre Sarto into a family of nine children on a small farm in the little village of Riese in the Province of Treviso, Italy near Venice on June 2, 1835 during the pontificate of Pope Gregory XVI. His father Giovanni Battista Sarto, a former postman and yet a cobbler by trade, died when Joseph was very young in 1852. Giovanni had been born Jan Krawiec in Wielkopolska, Poland, a tailor by trade. When Poland fell into Prussian hands, Jan and his wife sought political asylum in Italy. There he became a mailman first outside Treviso in Godero, Italy, and then settling in Riese. To offset any assimilation to his Polish roots for fear of reprisal, Jan translated his name to Giovanni Battista, still the same patron saint he was baptised under and adopted the Italian word for tailor - "sarto" as his new surname.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #7 on:** April 07, 2011, 10:47:14 AM »

I was a delegate for the Reform Party in the year 2000. (The youngest one, by the way.) I met Pat a couple of times while he was there.

He used to believe in "free trade" but he changed his tune. Some people can come around if they've been mistaken, and I'm sure he's one big enough to admit he's wrong.

I wasn't aware that he chose Sara Palin for "person of the year." To me, that's disappointing, considering he's against endless war, and Palin doesn't seem to mind it.

I don't know whether he goes to the diocesan Mass because he believes it would keep up his appearance, or if he really thinks that's the right way to go. I guess they would try to call him a raving anti semite if he went to the other one.... oh wait, they already did call him that. :scratchchin:

All I know, is that the CIA was outside of that Reform Party convention to make sure that Pat got no momentum and picked up only 500,000 votes during that election because of the fear mongering (as usual) by Catholics and pigeonholed republicans (yes, even trads fall into that category sometimes) saying, "If you don't vote for Bush... we'll get GORE and that's scary!" Similarly, in later elections, the same thing was done regarding the Constitution Party candidate, et cetera. Look who we have now! The fearmongering is starting to wear off of people because they're largely tired of it and are starting to see through this fraudulent "two party" farce.

He was ahead of his time. Just like Ron Paul back in 1988 was ahead of his time. People just weren't ready to take that leap and at least make a decent attempt to break free of the slave handlers. If Ron Paul doesn't get the nomination this time, I can pretty much guarantee you that we're going to see four more years of Osama. (Ahem, I mean, Obama.)

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #8 on:** April 07, 2011, 10:54:02 AM »

Clue: you don't have to agree with all of Palin's views to vote her "Person of the Year".

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #9 on:** April 07, 2011, 11:22:00 AM »

It doesn't seem to me that he agrees with most of her views, Stevus, if you read his publications on a regular basis.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #10 on:** April 07, 2011, 11:24:53 AM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

Clue: you don't have to agree with all of Palin's views to vote her "Person of the Year".

Clue: NO ONE actually said that such is necessary. It would seem pretty flipping obvious he LIKES/ESTEEMS her, eh?

Jackass-sans-justice is seeking to break all his previous records...stay tuned :tv-disturbed:

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #11 on:** April 07, 2011, 11:32:37 AM »

Time made Hitler their man of the year in '38.

Before making assumptions I'd look at what criteria he used. You can respect Palin's ability as a politician and how she's changed the national debate and not be a sycophantic cheerleader which shows you are "slipping". I suppose the inability of sedes to make distinctions spills over to all areas. Snap judgments are your forte. Or are you just making yet another "obvious observation" that miraculously agrees with your personal opinion?

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #12 on:** April 07, 2011, 12:07:27 PM »

I saw him make the statement about Pailin, at which time he also gave his reasons. As this thread is about Buchanan in general, I mentioned the one but did not see fit to discuss his choice in detail. Oddly, you assumed I was making assumptions, yet you have no proof whatsoever that such is the case -- jackass-sans-justice, exhibit A. It is also clear you assumed I think his decision means he agrees with ALL of Palin's views. That is your uninformed take, based upon nothing -- jackass-sans-justice, exhibit B.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #13 on:** April 07, 2011, 03:41:10 PM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

Time made Hitler their man of the year in '38.

Before making assumptions I'd look at what criteria he used. You can respect Palin's ability as a politician and how she's changed the national debate and not be a sycophantic cheerleader which shows you are "slipping". I suppose the inability of sedes to make distinctions spills over to all areas. Snap judgments are your forte. Or are you just making yet another "obvious observation" that miraculously agrees with your personal opinion?

Didnt take long for stevus to pull the sede-card out on this one.

Jackass-sans-justice... good title.. has a ring to it.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #14 on:** April 07, 2011, 04:47:55 PM »

As far as POLITICAL views, Palin makes a good candidate. But as far as moral views, not so much. Sure she's against abortion and all that, but she buys into this junk about how women should all have careers. She has a baby with down-syndrome. She should be at home with it, not considering running for president in a country overrun by Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and the NWO.