Pat Buchanan calls for new party to counter Bush's betrayal of workers

[cryofan]

Pat tears the American govt, and in particular Bush, a new one regarding their betrayal of the American workers, in particular the he talks about the way that they have undercut American wages and job opportunities through immigration.

>>>>

The front-page story by Mike Allen describes a Bush initiative on "immigration reform." Seems that U.S. employers would post jobs and the wages that go with them on a Department of Labor website. If no Americans came forward to take the jobs, the employer would be allowed to bring Mexican temporary workers in legally, give them the jobs, and put them on a fast track to permanent residency and citizenship.

What would this mean? U.S. companies would offer pay at or near the minimum wage for jobs they had open in, say, construction.

As few Americans can support a family and kids in school on $5 an hour, many of these jobs would go begging. The employer would then be allowed to go to Mexico, where the minimum wage is about 60 cents an hour, or countries where it is even less, and hire all the hard-working labor he needed at the U.S. minimum wage.

As there are billions of people on earth who do not earn anything near $5 an hour, what the Bush plan means is throwing open America's borders to millions of workers who will come in and suppress the wages of America's workers.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Pat goes on to talk about how Rove is selling out American workers in order to get Hispanic votes (I have to disagree with that strategy--many polls have shown that just as many Hispanics want LESS immigration, as want more).

He also talks about how outsourcing and offshoring have accelerated during Bush;s reign, while corporate profits have risen strongly.

He ends by calling for a a new political party. I gather that he is not planning on running for President himself, however Or maybe he is?

I think that we do need new political parties. I know that Pat is probably seen as some sort of racist here on DU, but I would consider him as more of a "culturist."

I think a lot of Pat's ideas are good, and his ideas about immigration are not racist. Many nonwhite Americans favor slowing down immigration. In fact, my own stepmother is an immigrant from Taiwan, and she feels very strongly about slowing down immigration.

I assume that Pat's new party would have a strong anti-immigration platform, and it would be likely that it would take votes from the GOP.

But would it also take votes from the Dems? In fact, if they had an anti-immigration platform, and a strong civil liberties platform (revoke Patriot act) and a strong social safety net platform, that would be my ideal party platform.

But this talk from Pat about a new party is probably going nowhere for now...

The rest of the article is here:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36355

[audibledevil]

1. Link

Link? I'd love a decent sized third party from the right to siphon votes.

[cthrumatrix]

45. Excellent idea....

[kalian]

2. Go Pat! Go!

Pat is really on our side...you know...AMERICA.

[Unforgiven]

17. Fine

So long as it splits the republican party.

[are_we_united_yet]

22. Never thought I'd see the day

I'd be cheering Buchanan on

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. LINK?

by the way, folks this tells me that the GOP is breaking up

[Captain Sunshine]

4. Link?

There are times when Buchanan makes sense, but I've had a problem with his immigration stance for a while.

I'd like to read more before I say more. Could you provide a link to he article, or was it only in print?

CS

[Crowdance]

5. Boo-yeah!

A GOP-splitting party, taking the hardcore haters out of the vote. That's JUST what we need. Prepare for an astounding rhetorical assault on the foreign and the female. It's gonna' be quite a show!

[stopbush]

20. Sorry, but this would siphon votes away from the Dem nominee, not bush.

Beware the Buchanans - wolves in conservative clothing. Pat is right on occasion, just like the proverbial broken clock. But does anyone here seriously believe his charge that workers/laborers need a third party? This from a staunch union-busting repug? Puh-leeze!

The Democratic party has traditionally been the party of labor and not big business. Union membership is down nationally because of Pat B and the Reagan/bush onslaught against the unions. It's they who are destroying the middle class (labor) and reforming this country into a two-caste system of financial elites and the poor. Just how many unions have ever endorsed a repug, especially of late?

No, this is Pat is sheep's clothing once again. He's doing the groundwork for the RNC on a new front, ie: the Dems have abandoned the common worker, so union members should vote third party. Bush wasn't getting a lot of those votes in any case, and this latest trick is meant to divide the labor vote between the Dem nominee and some powerless third party and their single-issue candidate.

If Pat really wanted to help labor, he'd advise them to vote for the Dem nominee over bush. But he won't do that because he's toeing the RNC radical line while posing as a conservative. Why should he jeopardize his cushy TV jobs by acting like a real conservative when TV doesn't want conservatives or liberals, they want raging right-wingers like Hannity?

Nice try Pat, but it's a bit obvious.

[Crowdance]

24. Of course there's not a sincere bone in his body!

He's hoping to find enough yahoos to get him elected. He doesn't care what kind of message he has to craft. And he has appeal to many of the stupid who can't possibly pin the blame for their dire economic and security position on anyone with real responsibility--so they'll happy blame it on Pat's foreigners and women.

[mitchum]

32. Very wise words from you, stopbush

You have sussed this one completely

[cosmicdot]

6. a google came up with this link - it's on the front page

http://www.theamericancause.org/

[cryofan]

7. sorry, here is the link

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36355

[Leilani]

8. Interesting

There is a large group of Conservatives/Republicans who are really mad at Bush about:
1.Free trade/decining wages/outsoucing
2.Out of control fed spending/huge deficit
3.Illegal immigation/open borders

If there was a 3rd party challenge, Shrub could lose many votes.

[alfredo]

33. There are a lot who don't like bush, but will never vote for a Dem.

those are the ones who will vote for Pat. As it is now, a lot are just going to sit the election out.

[AntiCoup2K4]

9. Buchanan/Moore 2004

Go Pat Go!!

[OrAnarch]

39. Buchanan is not running in 2004

"Thanks, but I am not thinking of it. Someone should, though. PJB"

[IndianaGreen]

10. The Buchanan Brigades rise again!

Go Pat go! And Zeig Heil to you too!

:crazy:

[Deesh]

11. Pat's Groove

I'm no fan of Patrick Buchanan's ideology, but I'm not so stingy that I wouldn't acknowledge his intelligence. In a debate against Bush, Bush would lose big-time to Buchanan. Pat PREPARES.

When I read Cryofan's post tonight, I have to admit that my reaction was purely selfish: I want Buchanan to form a right-wing challenge to Bush and steal away the margin of victory from the Republicans in closely-contested states in 2004 -- and with it, bring down a few GOP Congressional candidates.

Now that Press & Buchanan are off MSNBC, maybe Buchanan is getting stir-crazy and wants to hit the trail against his "too moderate" party.

Do it, Pat!

[proud patriot]

12. Good For Pat

I don't always agree with him but he's a guy
I can respect .

[Dr. Wu]

13. Give Pat $18 Million in Matching Funds

and he will find a party.

[Skip Intro]

14. Good News

This is good news, imho. Really good. Pat will have some support and I hope he will crank it up.

Say what you will about him - and I know there is a lot to be said - but he is sincere.

And there must be some on the repuke side tired of the moral sewer - searching for some kind of dignity, some sort of integrity, some ounce of sincerity. Some who will mount an effort to see the republican party restored to "honor".

I come close to thinking that if someone like Buchannan doesn't rise up to challenge bush, we should go after these taken-for-granted repukes. Lets make some converts.

Can't see Buchanan drawing Dem votes tho, although a Lieberman/Miller(Zell) scenario might result in something unforseen.

[libview]

46. The way I see it, Pat would take the labor vote

away from the Democrats. He may take some votes from the Right, but we cannot win without the unions and labor.
This is not a good thing, I wouldn't be suprised if it was a Republican plot to steal more elections.

[philosophie_en_rose]

15. Hooray for Pat!

His views on eugenics and immigration are repugnant. He's a pig, but at least he's an honest pig. I hope that he runs and siphons off paleocon votes.

However, I don't think that paleocons are really *'s constituency. What we really need is Fred Phelps to run.

[drb]

16. Plus, they're trying to lower the minimum wage....

Hmm. Looks like they want to hire three people at $1.50 an hour, instead of one person at $6.00 an hour.

Dial 1-800-Haliburton if you're interested.

Right.

This is the most vicious assault ever on the American way of life. The BFEE wants to turn this country into Mexico. We'll all be emigrating to Mexico, where the good jobs are!

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. It is scary when one starts agreeing with Buchanan more

often than not

Pat for workers rights? Get out of here? (He is)

Boy I hate to say it, but how far has the Right gone that Pat
sounds Moderate and rational

One thing I have to give to Pat... he does put country before
party... for that I have to fully respect him.

[buycitgo]

21. I wouldn't trust Buchanan any farther than he can jump on his bum knee

Buchanan's as inside as you can get

always remember: he conned the nomination for Perot's party in 2000, took their money, then DIDNT campaign!

he could've swung enough votes to lose it for dumbo then, but 'something' changed his mind about getting off his fat ass, and you can be sure that the same 'thing' will happen this time.

don't get your hopes up

[cryofan]

23. I agree. But howcum so few people have noticed this?

He sabotaged the Reform Party, didn't he? And if he did that then, maybe he is doing the same now? Of course, as many of us know, this election cycle has the potential to be a blockbuster for change in this country, and the powerbrokers in the GOP and Dems know it, too. Maybe Pat is their stalking horse, out to siphon off grassroots support and donations from all of the angry Freepers (and even DUers? Then once he is established as the right wing 3rd party, he takes a dive. Or maybe we are just paranoid?

[buycitgo]

30. that's exactly what they have planned

You KNOW they're working 24/7/52+overtime to cover ALL conceivable bases, and then some.

their two possible weaknessess:

overweening hubris, combined with paranoid psychosis.

they actually THINK there are LARGE pockets of media resistance to their message?

is their ANYthing more ludicrous?

did they watch ANY of the slobbering, slavish coverage since "we GOT 'im?"

like I said, they brook absolutely NO dissent

NONE!!!

and you know what that means, don't you?

jahwohl

btw, I got thrown off a plane last year for using that word in response to a male stewardess

[KoKo]

19. Pat's always been a Populist......but it's hard to ignore some of his

hard edges which border on White Supremacy/Racism. Still....given all that..he's a refreshing voice (at many times) to what's left of the Repug Party which is totally PNAC/RW FUNDIE in its makeup these days.

So, I welcome another voice in the mix. Who knows maybe we will all come together those of us non "PNAC/Fundies" and hammer out a "New Way for America's Future."

[eileen from OH]

25. Buchanan is a whackjob

but in many ways he's a lot more of a true conservative than the bunch that's running the administration and the RNC. And I can respect that. Really. Sorta. Okay, okay, they make me sick, too. But less sick.

eileen from OH

[mot78]

26. Go Pat GO!

When * gets kicked out of office, we can enjoy your supporters starting flame wars on FR.

[guitar man]

27. Pat is an asshat

But he is an asshat I can respect. If he can help call attention to *'s woeful performance in relation to American workers,all the more better. If he splits the RW vote,that would be real cool.

[loudnclear]

28. Run Pat Run!!!

But he won't and there will be no challenge among conservatives to the Bush regime. they know damn well that an alternative to Bush would be costly to Bush. He would probably lose.

[phillybri]

44. RUN, PAT, RUN!!!!

Amen!

[eleny]

29. What a debate! Shrub, Buchanan and the Dem!

[bleedingheart]

31. sometimes pat suprises me...

other times he scares me...

[Crunchy Frog]

34. Good!

I hope he runs as a third party candidate again. This time it might get some real traction and take some serious votes away from Bush.

[Jeep]

35. I don't know

He seemed to be popular among certain Jewish seniors in Florida in 2000.

[mot78]

42. Or so KKKatherine Harris/SCOTUS would argue

[hellhathnofury]

36. Encourage Pat to run. Remember Ross Perot

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=40010

Will Pitt's idea.

[liberalcapitalist]

40. the big difference was...

Ross Perot was a better candidate than Clinton.

[hellhathnofury]

41. 1% 2% good enough for me. n/t

[Elwood P Dowd]

37. Most repubs do not like Pat

because he tells it like it is too much. They don’t want to hear reality from one of their own.

I never met the man, but someone I know who once worked for a Democratic Congressman said Pat was a thorn in the side of the money crowd in the republican party. They did not like his statements on free trade and immigration. He was not invited to many of their elite gatherings. They would call him names like protectionist, isolationist, extremist, and racist. Much of his negative press and reputation actually came from the republican party.

This person said he was more intelligent than about 95% of the republican congress and talking media heads, so that didn’t help his reputation either.

Pat would back off for short periods, support the republican propaganda, and get back in the limelight. It wouldn’t be long though before he was right back at his bashing of republican elitist policies. After this article, he will probably be on the outs again. He’s the republican version of Ralph Nader I guess, and they’re both right on our free trade policies.

[corporatewhore]

38. Buchanan could be key must read

Buchanan more spoiler than Nader, in state-based analysis
The conventional view is that Nader cost Gore a victory, while Buchanan was not a factor, because Nader won 2.8 million votes to Buchanan’s 450,000. But the key question is which states were so close that third-party voters could have made a difference, had they instead voted for Bush or Gore.
There were 8 states in which no candidate received a majority of votes. In ME and NE, Gore won , so those are moot. In FL and NH, Bush won, but by fewer votes than Nader received .
In the remaining four states, IA, NM, OR, and WI, Buchanan’s vote total exceeded the difference between Gore and Bush. Combined, these four states account for 30 electoral votes, or one more than FL and NH combined. In other words, if Buchanan has dropped out and his supporters had switched to Bush, Bush would not have needed Florida to become president. "‘../askme/election_by_state.htm’"
Source: Davis Leonhardt, New York Times, p. 4 Dec 10, 2000

[dusty64]

43. This could be VERY

interesting.