Folks, this is not Tinfoil, unless you are in denial w/ your head in the sand or up where the sun don't shine.

If you don't believe it or brush it off, you need to do some deeper analysis and try to project the issues into the future. A basic skill of a successful prepper.


From Drugereports headline...


NEW BUCHANAN BOOK DECLARES 'END OF AMERICA'
Sun Nov 25 2007 20:40:15 ET

**Exclusive**

"America is coming apart, decomposing, and...the likelihood of her survival as one nation...is improbable -- and impossible if America continues on her current course," declares Pat Buchanan. "For we are on a path to national suicide."

The best-selling author and former presidential candidate is on the eve of launching his new epic book: DAY OR RECKONING: HOW HUBRIS, IDEOLOGY AND GREED ARE TEARING AMERICA APART.

This time, Buchanan goes all the way:

"America is in an existential crisis from which the nation may not survive."

The U.S. Army is breaking and is too small to meet America’s global commitments.

The dollar has sunk to historic lows and is being abandoned by foreign governments.

U.S. manufacturing is being hollowed out.

The greatest invasion in history, from the Third World, is swamping the ethno-cultural core of the country, leading to Balkanization and the loss of the Southwest to Mexico.


The culture is collapsing and the nation is being deconstructed along the lines of race and class.

A fiscal crisis looms as the unfunded mandates of Social Security and Medicare remain unaddressed.

All these crises are hitting America at once -- a perfect storm of crises.

Specifically, Buchanan contends:

• Pax Americana, the era of U.S. global dominance, is over. A struggle for global hegemony has begun among the United States, China, a resurgent Russia and radical Islam

• Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a product of hubris and of ideology, a secular religion of “democratism,” to which Bush was converted in the days following 9/11

• Torn asunder by a culture war, America has now begun to break down along class, ethnic and racial lines.

• The greatest threat to U.S. sovereignty and independence is the scheme of a global elite to erase America’s borders and merge the USA, Mexico and Canada into a North American Union.

• Free trade is shipping jobs, factories and technology to China and plunging America into permanent dependency and unpayable debt. One of every six U.S. manufacturing jobs vanished under Bush

• “Sovereign Wealth Funds,” controlled by foreign regimes and stuffed with trillions of dollars from U.S. trade deficits, are buying up strategic corporate assets vital to America’s security

• As U.S. wages are stagnant, corporate CEOs are raking in rising pay and benefits 400 to 500 times that of their workers

• The Third World invasion through Mexico is a graver threat to our survival as one nation than anything happening in Afghanistan or Iraq

* European-Americans, 89% of the nation when JFK took the oath, are now 66% and sinking. Before 2050, America is a Third World nation

• By 2060, America will add 167 million people and 105 million immigrants will be here, triple the 37 million today.

• Hispanics will be over 100 million in 2050 and concentrated in a Southwest most Mexicans believe belongs to them

Buchanan’s Recommendations:

• A new foreign-defense policy that closes most of the 1000 bases overseas, reviews all alliances, and brings home U.S. troops

• A purge of neoconservative ideology and the “Cakewalk” crowd” from national power.

• To avert a second Cold War, the United States should “get out of Russia’s space and get out of Russia’s face,” and shut down all U.S. bases on the soil of the former Soviet Union

• To reach a cold peace in the culture war, Buchanan urges a return to federalism and the overthrow of our judicial dictatorship by Congressionally mandated restrictions on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

• To end the trade deficits and save the dollar, Buchanan urges a Hamiltonian solution: a 20% Border Equity Tax on imports, with the $500 billion raised to be used to end taxation on American producers

• To prevent America becoming “a tangle of squabbling nationalities” Buchanan urges: No amnesty for the 12-20 million illegal aliens; a border fence from San Diego to Brownsville; Congressional declarations that children born to illegal aliens are not citizens and English is the language of the United States; and a “timeout” on all immigration.

Developing...

pretty much how I see it,, but then again, I am a foil hat society member....well according so some around here

we are toast and the next generation,,is gonna hand it over
all of us came up in the 60 and 70s..it our own fault and have allowed it to happen

Quoted: pretty much how I see it,, but then again, I am a foil hat society member....well according so some around here we are toast and the next generation,,is gonna hand it over all of us came up in the 60 and 70s..it our own fault and have allowed it to happen

+1

it all sounds about right to me. get your land and preps ready. for years I've been thinking that the U.S. was going the way of the Soviet Union. spending too much money, and not concentrating on domestic issues.  I foresee a collapse. just hope I'm ready when it happens. when the USSR collapsed it turned into a major SHTF situation for them.

The future will be no more recognizable to us then our present would have been to the Founders.

A slight majority of Americans of all types surely would agree with most of Buchanan's take, and most of his recommendations. What with unaudited voting machine tallies, and corporate money, the politicos barely care what ANY majority thinks. Fixing things makes waves, and most of the political class are in real posh, but delicately balanced, boats!  Thomas Jefferson (orig.) almost exactly predicted this 200 years ago!

The US Army is breaking?

Close our foreign bases and roll home? Yeah, let's let the rest of the planet de-stabilize and aspiring superpowers expand and see how well that works out for us.

Quoted: The US Army is breaking? Close our foreign bases and roll home? Yeah, let's let the rest of the planet de-stabilize and aspiring superpowers expand and see how well that works out for us.

Yeah, that part didn't make sense. He's an isolationist -but no one is perfect...

Quoted: The US Army is breaking? Close our foreign bases and roll home? Yeah, let's let the rest of the planet de-stabilize and aspiring superpowers expand and see how well that works out for us.

We have problems of our own behind our own borders.  Policing the world shouldn't be our job.

Quoted: The U.S. Army is breaking and is too small to meet America’s global commitments.

What "global commitments"?  

There should be no commitments except guarding our country.  The trouble is that our government is nation-building and doing things it shouldn't be doing.

Quoted: The dollar has sunk to historic lows and is being abandoned by foreign governments.

All in the name of globalism.  America has to sink for the billionaires to get richer.

Quoted: U.S. manufacturing is being hollowed out.

All for globalism and to make our elite richer at the rest of the countries expense.

The greatest invasion in history, from the Third World, is swamping the ethno-cultural core of the country, leading to Balkanization and the loss of the Southwest to Mexico.

Globalism, same as above

Quoted: Quoted: The U.S. Army is breaking and is too small to meet America’s global commitments. What "global commitments"?   There should be no commitments except guarding our country.  The trouble is that our government is nation-building and doing things it shouldn't be doing. Quoted: The dollar has sunk to historic lows and is being abandoned by foreign governments. All in the name of globalism.  America has to sink for the billionaires to get richer. Quoted: U.S. manufacturing is being hollowed out. All for globalism and to make our elite richer at the rest of the countries expense. The greatest invasion in history, from the Third World, is swamping the ethno-cultural core of the country, leading to Balkanization and the loss of the Southwest to Mexico. Globalism, same as above

+1

Retrict the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and Presedent can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts.

Quoted: Retrict the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and Presedent can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts.

Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right?

Quoted: *snip* • To reach a cold peace in the culture war, Buchanan urges a return to federalism and the overthrow of our judicial dictatorship by Congressionally mandated restrictions on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. *snip*

SCOTUS has made tons of bad decisions, but allowing the legislative branch to wield supreme power over america is the quickest way i can think of to guarantee a dictatorship is installed here in the US.

Once I again I think Pat is about 90% on the money. This should be a wake up call but his book and predictions will never get the coverage it deserves and of course Oprah will not have something like this on her book of the month club. I'm going to go out and buy today during lunch to see what gives. I'm sure I won't be getting that warm and fuzzy feeling about where we are heading as a nation.

Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right?

You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?  All that would be required is for a Democrat congress and Democrat President to be in office and they would erase the constitution.  ANYONE who things the Supreme court should be controlled by congress needs to go back and read why we have 3 EQUAL branches of government.  Hugo Chavez likes the kind of stuff Pat is proposing - he is doing it in Venezuela.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right? You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?

You mean like McCain-Fiengold?

This country is a lot closer to Venezuela than the real United States of America.

Holy fuck!  The corruption goes ALL THE WAY to the President!

ETA:  3 branches of Government?  Yeah... Hear no evil, speak no evil, and see no evil.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right? You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?

You mean like McCain-Fiengold?

This country is a lot closer to Venezuela than the real United States of America.

Holy fuck!  The corruption goes ALL THE WAY to the President!

ETA:  3 branches of Government?  Yeah... Hear no evil, speak no evil, and see no evil.  [/quote

Ok lets use logic then:

Supreme court in place  = a chance to declare a law un-constitutional

Supreme court restricted = zero chance to declare a law un-constitutional

You are supporting zero chance - think about it.

You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Quoted: You are supporting zero chance - think about it.

No...

I support voting out every official up for re-election regardless of party affiliation.

I support term limits for Federal Judges.

And I support execution for conviction of high crimes against our country.

2 term limit on legislators needs to be enacted and every excess perk taken from government officials.  No fancy retirement after serving 6 years, no allowance for living/cars/etc, no 120 day work year, everything must go..  

They should get a base salary and benefits comparable to what the middle class gets.

Quoted: Quoted: You are supporting zero chance - think about it. No... I support voting out every official up for re-election regardless of party affiliation. I support term limits for Federal Judges. And I support execution for conviction of high crimes against our country.

Fuel for the fire.


Hiding Trillions more of Nat'l Debt? - MSN Story

go pat go!

"Congressionally mandated restrictions on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court."

he is solely talking about limiting the supreme court jurisdiction on social issues... abortion, gay marriage, etc, turning the issues to the states and using constitutional authority to restrict the feds from interferring with state law on those issues. ron paul wrote one of the original bills buchanan supports...
and it would do exactly what i just said above.

Quoted: Quoted: *snip* • To reach a cold peace in the culture war, Buchanan urges a return to federalism and the overthrow of our judicial dictatorship by Congressionally mandated restrictions on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. *snip* SCOTUS has made tons of bad decisions, but allowing the legislative branch to wield supreme power over america is the quickest way i can think of to guarantee a dictatorship is installed here in the US.

Keep in mind that HE wanted the job of president, too. Big surprise that he'd want to restrict the powers of the OTHER parts of the "checks and balances".

I heard a bit on NPR with Buchanan plugging his book.  It sounded to me as if he is not entirely unreasonable in his thinking.  Problem is, most folks will only hear what they want and try to make it conform to the political reality they most desire.  It was nice to hear him giving an intelligent and insightful interview and not being badgered into some kind of ideological trap.  

Nothing he says in that little blurb really makes my liberal blood boil.  Personally, I think both sides have gone too far in relying on the federal government to be their problem solver.  Once you get past the point of guaranteeing basic human and civil rights of citizens of the various States, the federal government's involvement in social engineering is a farce.  The federal government is far too intrusive into the daily lives of law-abiding citizens.  Many of the divisions that now confront us could be best handled by the States to suit their own citizens.  

J.

Quoted: I heard a bit on NPR with Buchanan plugging his book.  It sounded to me as if he is not entirely unreasonable in his thinking.  Problem is, most folks will only hear what they want and try to make it conform to the political reality they most desire.  It was nice to hear him giving an intelligent and insightful interview and not being badgered into some kind of ideological trap.   Nothing he says in that little blurb really makes my liberal blood boil.  Personally, I think both sides have gone too far in relying on the federal government to be their problem solver.  Once you get past the point of guaranteeing basic human and civil rights of citizens of the various States, the federal government's involvement in social engineering is a farce.  The federal government is far too intrusive into the daily lives of law-abiding citizens.  Many of the divisions that now confront us could be best handled by the States to suit their own citizens.   J.

Agreed. The Federal government has gotten too big and powerful. Between a .gov that fails to put America and Americans first and a MSM that has long forgotten what America is supposed to be all about I see little hope of any of the threats we face (militant radical Islam, demographic shifts, multi-national corporations, illegal immigration, currency collapse, loss of manufacturing ability, moral decay, declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations, energy dependency, etc., etc.) being addressed, let alone solved. Somehow, just voting for the closest thing to the "right" guy seems like pissing into the wind...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right? You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?  All that would be required is for a Democrat congress and Democrat President to be in office and they would erase the constitution.  ANYONE who things the Supreme court should be controlled by congress needs to go back and read why we have 3 EQUAL branches of government.  Hugo Chavez likes the kind of stuff Pat is proposing - he is doing it in Venezuela.

azsavage- may I recommend an excellent book on this issue.  Judicial Dictatorship by Quirk and Bridwell.  The US Supreme Court has become what the founding fathers feared it would become- a mechanism by which the rights of the majority are trampled.  Thomas Jefferson, as well as many others, stated that the 2nd Amendment gives citizens the means to take back control of their government in such a situation.
It is an easy read, about 200 pages.  When I first read it, I was shocked to read the actual letters of the founding fathers on this issue.  They would be branded terrorists today.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right? You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?  All that would be required is for a Democrat congress and Democrat President to be in office and they would erase the constitution.  ANYONE who things the Supreme court should be controlled by congress needs to go back and read why we have 3 EQUAL branches of government.  Hugo Chavez likes the kind of stuff Pat is proposing - he is doing it in Venezuela. azsavage- may I recommend an excellent book on this issue.  Judicial Dictatorship by Quirk and Bridwell.  The US Supreme Court has become what the founding fathers feared it would become- a mechanism by which the rights of the majority are trampled.  Thomas Jefferson, as well as many others, stated that the 2nd Amendment gives citizens the means to take back control of their government in such a situation. It is an easy read, about 200 pages.  When I first read it, I was shocked to read the actual letters of the founding fathers on this issue.  They would be branded terrorists today.

if you really think that the problems we have with ou government can be solved by *removing* the SCOTUS, you probably have an agenda that goes along with, that that would be facilitated by a system in which people have no general legal recourse against the government.

i'll say it again, we have some big problems now, and SCOTUS has made some insanely bad decisions, but getting rid of the Supreme Court will do far more damage then it could ever possibly fix.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right? You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?  All that would be required is for a Democrat congress and Democrat President to be in office and they would erase the constitution.  ANYONE who things the Supreme court should be controlled by congress needs to go back and read why we have 3 EQUAL branches of government.  Hugo Chavez likes the kind of stuff Pat is proposing - he is doing it in Venezuela. azsavage- may I recommend an excellent book on this issue.  Judicial Dictatorship by Quirk and Bridwell.  The US Supreme Court has become what the founding fathers feared it would become- a mechanism by which the rights of the majority are trampled.  Thomas Jefferson, as well as many others, stated that the 2nd Amendment gives citizens the means to take back control of their government in such a situation. It is an easy read, about 200 pages.  When I first read it, I was shocked to read the actual letters of the founding fathers on this issue.  They would be branded terrorists today. if you really think that the problems we have with ou government can be solved by *removing* the SCOTUS, you probably have an agenda that goes along with, that that would be facilitated by a system in which people have no general legal recourse against the government. i'll say it again, we have some big problems now, and SCOTUS has made some insanely bad decisions, but getting rid of the Supreme Court will do far more damage then it could ever possibly fix.

bullyforyou- Nowhere in my post did I advocate getting rid of the SCOTUS.  As far as my "agenda" you speak of- I was not aware that I had one.  It is obvious that you did not read the book I recommended- nor did you read my post. Reread it.  

Quoted: Quoted: I heard a bit on NPR with Buchanan plugging his book.  It sounded to me as if he is not entirely unreasonable in his thinking.  Problem is, most folks will only hear what they want and try to make it conform to the political reality they most desire.  It was nice to hear him giving an intelligent and insightful interview and not being badgered into some kind of ideological trap.   Nothing he says in that little blurb really makes my liberal blood boil.  Personally, I think both sides have gone too far in relying on the federal government to be their problem solver.  Once you get past the point of guaranteeing basic human and civil rights of citizens of the various States, the federal government's involvement in social engineering is a farce.  The federal government is far too intrusive into the daily lives of law-abiding citizens.  Many of the divisions that now confront us could be best handled by the States to suit their own citizens.   J. Agreed. The Federal government has gotten too big and powerful. Between a .gov that fails to put America and Americans first and a MSM that has long forgotten what America is supposed to be all about I see little hope of any of the threats we face (militant radical Islam, demographic shifts, multi-national corporations, illegal immigration, currency collapse, loss of manufacturing ability, moral decay, declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations, energy dependency, et., etc.) being addressed, let alone solved. Somehow, just voting for the closest thing to the "right" guy seems like pissing into the wind...

Once again another perfect recruit for Buchanan's 'soft fascism'...

It's also ironic that you decry a 'loss of manufacturing ability' and a 'declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations'...

Keeping unskilled manufacturing in the US - let alone trying to BRING IT BACK - would do more damage to 'intellectual advancement' than you could possibly imagine (Which is probably why you haven't figured out that unskilled MFG = BAD on a national scale)....

Yeah, let's force companies to keep jobs any 3rd-world idiot can do here in a 1st world country... Let's see how many jobs we can have that can be done by anyone with a 5th grade education... That will be REAL GOOD for economic development...

Quoted: Once again another perfect recruit for Buchanan's 'soft fascism'... It's also ironic that you decry a 'loss of manufacturing ability' and a 'declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations'... Keeping unskilled manufacturing in the US - let alone trying to BRING IT BACK - would do more damage to 'intellectual advancement' than you could possibly imagine (Which is probably why you haven't figured out that unskilled MFG = BAD on a national scale).... Yeah, let's force companies to keep jobs any 3rd-world idiot can do here in a 1st world country... Let's see how many jobs we can have that can be done by anyone with a 5th grade education... That will be REAL GOOD for economic development...

Good post about losing unskilled dipstick manufacturing jobs.  Let the Chi-coms make the rubber dog crap for $.50 an hour.  I DO agree that the Govt. is too big and into way too many areas of our life.   We know what happens when the Govt. gets involved in most things.

AC

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right? You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?  All that would be required is for a Democrat congress and Democrat President to be in office and they would erase the constitution.  ANYONE who things the Supreme court should be controlled by congress needs to go back and read why we have 3 EQUAL branches of government.  Hugo Chavez likes the kind of stuff Pat is proposing - he is doing it in Venezuela. azsavage- may I recommend an excellent book on this issue.  Judicial Dictatorship by Quirk and Bridwell.  The US Supreme Court has become what the founding fathers feared it would become- a mechanism by which the rights of the majority are trampled.  Thomas Jefferson, as well as many others, stated that the 2nd Amendment gives citizens the means to take back control of their government in such a situation. It is an easy read, about 200 pages.  When I first read it, I was shocked to read the actual letters of the founding fathers on this issue.  They would be branded terrorists today. if you really think that the problems we have with ou government can be solved by *removing* the SCOTUS, you probably have an agenda that goes along with, that that would be facilitated by a system in which people have no general legal recourse against the government. i'll say it again, we have some big problems now, and SCOTUS has made some insanely bad decisions, but getting rid of the Supreme Court will do far more damage then it could ever possibly fix. bullyforyou- Nowhere in my post did I advocate getting rid of the SCOTUS.  As far as my "agenda" you speak of- I was not aware that I had one.  It is obvious that you did not read the book I recommended- nor did you read my post. Reread it.

my bad, i should have phrased that differently. i wasn't pointing that comment directly at you, i was using your quote to further a point i had previously made, and was using the word "you" for "people in general".

'soft facism?'
thats funny coming from a thompson supporter, but i digress.

i disagree with buchanan on trade. im a pure free trader, not a corporate nafta-ite however. dave-a is pretty dead on with his post reguarding trade, but buchanan's overall thesis is solid, even if he is wrong in saying 'free' trade caused those problems. nafta, cafta and the trade deals might of had something to do with it all, but they are not 'free' trade, they are government, just a slightly different form of protectionism that buchanan advocates.

but back to the topic at hand who is talking about eliminating the supreme court? congress has the constitutional duty/right to create the federal courts and they can constitutionally limit the courts jurisdiction. buchanan's proposal is a proposal of FEDERALISM. the old rightists that are left, buchanan, ron paul, etc, support a bill that strips the courts of thier jurisdiction in abortion and gay marriage cases, both social issues. that is basically a re-statement of the 10th amendment. the supreme court is not supposed to be deciding these issues for the whole country. that is the point. to limit federal oversight into all areas of the peoples lives and to leave divisive issues to the states where they are supposed to be constitutionally.

he explains it quite nicely in his 'where the right went wrong' book.
another interesting note, judicial review isnt even necessarily constitutional as many strict constructionists of the constitution in the 18th and 19th centuries argued.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Retract the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and President can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right? You realize that the DC gun ban would be unchallenged and probably nationwide without the court?  All that would be required is for a Democrat congress and Democrat President to be in office and they would erase the constitution.  ANYONE who things the Supreme court should be controlled by congress needs to go back and read why we have 3 EQUAL branches of government.  Hugo Chavez likes the kind of stuff Pat is proposing - he is doing it in Venezuela. azsavage- may I recommend an excellent book on this issue.  Judicial Dictatorship by Quirk and Bridwell.  The US Supreme Court has become what the founding fathers feared it would become- a mechanism by which the rights of the majority are trampled.  Thomas Jefferson, as well as many others, stated that the 2nd Amendment gives citizens the means to take back control of their government in such a situation. It is an easy read, about 200 pages.  When I first read it, I was shocked to read the actual letters of the founding fathers on this issue.  They would be branded terrorists today. if you really think that the problems we have with ou government can be solved by *removing* the SCOTUS, you probably have an agenda that goes along with, that that would be facilitated by a system in which people have no general legal recourse against the government. i'll say it again, we have some big problems now, and SCOTUS has made some insanely bad decisions, but getting rid of the Supreme Court will do far more damage then it could ever possibly fix. bullyforyou- Nowhere in my post did I advocate getting rid of the SCOTUS.  As far as my "agenda" you speak of- I was not aware that I had one.  It is obvious that you did not read the book I recommended- nor did you read my post. Reread it.   my bad, i should have phrased that differently. i wasn't pointing that comment directly at you, i was using your quote to further a point i had previously made, and was using the word "you" for "people in general".

No problem- I've been in the courthouse since 3:30 this morning, and I am praying to God for the strength not to bash attorneys' skulls in...  I was frustrated and had my panties in a wad when I read it.  

height=8

Quoted: It's also ironic that you decry a 'loss of manufacturing ability' and a 'declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations'... Keeping unskilled manufacturing in the US - let alone trying to BRING IT BACK - would do more damage to 'intellectual advancement' than you could possibly imagine (Which is probably why you haven't figured out that unskilled MFG = BAD on a national scale).... Yeah, let's force companies to keep jobs any 3rd-world idiot can do here in a 1st world country... Let's see how many jobs we can have that can be done by anyone with a 5th grade education... That will be REAL GOOD for economic development...

Question for you... How long are we going to remain a 1st world country?  At the present rate of illegal immigration how long do you think it will be before this country is overwhelmed with people only able to do unskilled labor?  We need to keep every job we can in this country, skilled or unskilled?  We need to get Americans back into the mindset that work is a verb, not an adjective.  To many folks now are to proud to do unskilled labor.  Too many more sit at home and collect government checks for doing absolutely nothing.  This country became what it is/was because we had scores of people who did those unskilled labor jobs.  Somewhere we became a nation to good to keep those traditions alive.

I don't understand your statement "Keeping unskilled manufacturing in the US - let alone trying to BRING IT BACK - would do more damage to 'intellectual advancement' than you could possibly imagine"...  Please explain.  

I don't get something about globalism.

Maybe some Arfcom experts can help me out here.

So it's OK to let all our lower tech easy manufacturing jobs go
to third world countries .So much so that we no longer have the
immidiate ability to produce many of these items ourselves.

No big deal,we'll just keep shipping the stuff here from halfway
around the globe.
We don't need to make the stuff ,so we'll just remain dependant
on products made in countries that are either communist,dictatorships,
and/or primarliy islamic.

What if that was our attitude in 1938 ?

I can just hear somebody saying it's not 1938 ,it's 2007 .
Things have changed.
The big wars would be decided in minutes based on what
was already available.

Times have changed,but the concept is the same.
Technology has altered warfare,but logistics are still
an extremely important part of it .

Look at the politics worldwide.

Looks a lot like 1938 to me .Only the players and the
technology are different.



"He must be crazy !"
"This is the mightiest most advanced nation of all time,
Rome could never fall" .


Buchanan may be crazy,or he may be right.

Taking a chance that he's wrong and not even
considering the facts is DEFINATELY crazy.

Quoted: Folks, this is not Tinfoil, unless you are in denial w/ your head in the sand or up where the sun don't shine. If you don't believe it or brush it off, you need to do some deeper analysis and try to project the issues into the future. A basic skill of a successful prepper. From Drugereports headline... NEW BUCHANAN BOOK DECLARES 'END OF AMERICA' Sun Nov 25 2007 20:40:15 ET **Exclusive** "America is coming apart, decomposing, and...the likelihood of her survival as one nation...is improbable -- and impossible if America continues on her current course," declares Pat Buchanan. "For we are on a path to national suicide." The best-selling author and former presidential candidate is on the eve of launching his new epic book: DAY OR RECKONING: HOW HUBRIS, IDEOLOGY AND GREED ARE TEARING AMERICA APART. This time, Buchanan goes all the way: "America is in an existential crisis from which the nation may not survive." The U.S. Army is breaking and is too small to meet America’s global commitments. The dollar has sunk to historic lows and is being abandoned by foreign governments. U.S. manufacturing is being hollowed out. The greatest invasion in history, from the Third World, is swamping the ethno-cultural core of the country, leading to Balkanization and the loss of the Southwest to Mexico. The culture is collapsing and the nation is being deconstructed along the lines of race and class. A fiscal crisis looms as the unfunded mandates of Social Security and Medicare remain unaddressed. All these crises are hitting America at once -- a perfect storm of crises. Specifically, Buchanan contends: • Pax Americana, the era of U.S. global dominance, is over. A struggle for global hegemony has begun among the United States, China, a resurgent Russia and radical Islam • Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a product of hubris and of ideology, a secular religion of “democratism,” to which Bush was converted in the days following 9/11 • Torn asunder by a culture war, America has now begun to break down along class, ethnic and racial lines. • The greatest threat to U.S. sovereignty and independence is the scheme of a global elite to erase America’s borders and merge the USA, Mexico and Canada into a North American Union. • Free trade is shipping jobs, factories and technology to China and plunging America into permanent dependency and unpayable debt. One of every six U.S. manufacturing jobs vanished under Bush • “Sovereign Wealth Funds,” controlled by foreign regimes and stuffed with trillions of dollars from U.S. trade deficits, are buying up strategic corporate assets vital to America’s security • As U.S. wages are stagnant, corporate CEOs are raking in rising pay and benefits 400 to 500 times that of their workers • The Third World invasion through Mexico is a graver threat to our survival as one nation than anything happening in Afghanistan or Iraq * European-Americans, 89% of the nation when JFK took the oath, are now 66% and sinking. Before 2050, America is a Third World nation • By 2060, America will add 167 million people and 105 million immigrants will be here, triple the 37 million today. • Hispanics will be over 100 million in 2050 and concentrated in a Southwest most Mexicans believe belongs to them Buchanan’s Recommendations: • A new foreign-defense policy that closes most of the 1000 bases overseas, reviews all alliances, and brings home U.S. troops • A purge of neoconservative ideology and the “Cakewalk” crowd” from national power. • To avert a second Cold War, the United States should “get out of Russia’s space and get out of Russia’s face,” and shut down all U.S. bases on the soil of the former Soviet Union • To reach a cold peace in the culture war, Buchanan urges a return to federalism and the overthrow of our judicial dictatorship by Congressionally mandated restrictions on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. • To end the trade deficits and save the dollar, Buchanan urges a Hamiltonian solution: a 20% Border Equity Tax on imports, with the $500 billion raised to be used to end taxation on American producers • To prevent America becoming “a tangle of squabbling nationalities” Buchanan urges: No amnesty for the 12-20 million illegal aliens; a border fence from San Diego to Brownsville; Congressional declarations that children born to illegal aliens are not citizens and English is the language of the United States; and a “timeout” on all immigration. Developing...

Look at what he's advocating

Look at 1939 Germany

See the paralells

Repeat 'I am not a closet fascist' a few times...

And remember what you learned for the next time someone proposes 'Fascism Lite' (sans the genocide and global conquest).....

Quoted: Quoted: It's also ironic that you decry a 'loss of manufacturing ability' and a 'declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations'... Keeping unskilled manufacturing in the US - let alone trying to BRING IT BACK - would do more damage to 'intellectual advancement' than you could possibly imagine (Which is probably why you haven't figured out that unskilled MFG = BAD on a national scale).... Yeah, let's force companies to keep jobs any 3rd-world idiot can do here in a 1st world country... Let's see how many jobs we can have that can be done by anyone with a 5th grade education... That will be REAL GOOD for economic development... Question for you... How long are we going to remain a 1st world country?   As long as we remain the #1 economic (By GDP) and military (by exerting our will as needed to support our interests) power in the world At the present rate of illegal immigration how long do you think it will be before this country is overwhelmed with people only able to do unskilled labor? Not going to happen. 'Migrant' workers go where the jobs are, and when the jobs are no longer there, they leave We need to keep every job we can in this country, skilled or unskilled?  No, we need to get rid of every single unionized unskilled labor position. Gone, bye-bye, so-long... It will reduce the rate of illegal immigration, it will improve quality of life in the US, and take a HUGE amount of dead union weight out of our economy We need to get Americans back into the mindset that work is a verb, not an adjective.  To many folks now are to proud to do unskilled labor. Too many more sit at home and collect government checks for doing absolutely nothing. Which is a welfare problem, that doesn't mean we should engage in 'indirect welfare' by forcing employers to overpay these slugs for being slugs  This country became what it is/was because we had scores of people who did those unskilled labor jobs.  No, this country USED to be an irrelevant and undeveloped backwater... We used to be, well, like Mexico is today... And when we were like that, we had a low cost of living, an illiterate population, and an economy geared to work in those conditions. The price of first world living is that your 3rd-world jobs must fall off, like baby teeth Somewhere we became a nation to good to keep those traditions alive. They're not 'noble traditions', they're economic activities that are not sustainable in the US economy, with a 1st world cost of living... They should be killed quickly, not kept alive Remember - factory work that was worth $5/day back in 1920 is still, really worth about $5/day... The fact that an American can't live on $5/day now doesn't mean that we should pay him $25/hr to do a $5/day job... It means that the $5/day job should be outsourced to Mexico, where a Mexican will gladly accept $5/day because he'd get $2/day working for a Mexican firm.... That's called FREE MARKET ECONOMICS... It is very efficient & effective in these situations, if the government & unions are kept out of the picture.... I don't understand your statement "Keeping unskilled manufacturing in the US - let alone trying to BRING IT BACK - would do more damage to 'intellectual advancement' than you could possibly imagine"...  Please explain.

Quoted: I don't get something about globalism. Maybe some Arfcom experts can help me out here. So it's OK to let all our lower tech easy manufacturing jobs go to third world countries .So much so that we no longer have the immidiate ability to produce many of these items ourselves. No big deal,we'll just keep shipping the stuff here from halfway around the globe. We don't need to make the stuff ,so we'll just remain dependant on products made in countries that are either communist,dictatorships, and/or primarliy islamic. What if that was our attitude in 1938 ? I can just hear somebody saying it's not 1938 ,it's 2007 . Things have changed. The big wars would be decided in minutes based on what was already available. Times have changed,but the concept is the same. Technology has altered warfare,but logistics are still an extremely important part of it . Look at the politics worldwide. Looks a lot like 1938 to me .Only the players and the technology are different. "He must be crazy !" "This is the mightiest most advanced nation of all time, Rome could never fall" . Buchanan may be crazy,or he may be right. Taking a chance that he's wrong and not even considering the facts is DEFINATELY crazy.

Our ability to make rubber dogshit and garbage pails has NOTHING to do with our national survival or defense...

United Defense
Lockheed-Martin
Rayethon
Boeing
Electric Boat
Northrop-Grumman
FNH-USA
Colt

All still manufacturing ADVANCED GOODS - military equipment for your '1938' scenario right here in the USA...

So what if we buy our web gear from Vietnam...

Oh, and in case you forgot, there is one big difference between 1938 and 2007 - we actually HAVE a viable military, rather than having to pull one out of our ASS a few years later...

But Pat is reminding me more and more of the Nazi sympathizers IN 1938 - the 'America First' isolationist/pro-German movement...

We all know how well THAT worked out....

Quoted: Quoted: Retrict the Supreme court?   The checks and balances are in place so that the Congress and Presedent can not bypass the constitution.  He is nuts. Right.  So they can't do things like ban political speech.  Right?

They wouldn't do that, that could have the effect of protecting incumbents.

"But Pat is reminding me more and more of the Nazi sympathizers IN 1938 - the 'America First' isolationist/pro-German movement...

We all know how well THAT worked out...."

closet facist? this is absolutely laughable. do you really take yourself seriously?

1930's germany supported the total state. buchanan supports federalism. that is about all that is needed to see that you dont know what you are talking about. limited government similar to the founding generations vision and the nazi total state... hardly similar.

america first are nazi sympathizers? you have really mastered the liberal line of branding your enemies 'un patriotic' and sympathizing with the enemy, good job, comrade.

america first was NOT pro german, they were anti war. they believed in the founding fathers foreign policy. obviously those of the founding generation were un patriotic pacifist pussy enemy combatants.

I think Buchanan talks sense about 60% of the time, which is a lot more than most pundits.

The economic isolationism is a road to nowhere, and I suspect he is a bit of a racist.  He puts it all in terms of culture, but sometimes the mask slips.

Quoted: Buchanan may be crazy,or he may be right. Taking a chance that he's wrong and not even considering the facts is DEFINATELY crazy.

Isn't that the truth?

You don't have to agree w/ Buchanan, but someone would have to pretty stupid not to CONSIDER and project FORWARD the obvious issues he is pointing out.

Some of his more radical atatements [that I don't agree w/] may be to enhance the sales of his book.

Nontheless, many of his points should be great cause for concern if one simply takes the analysis of a few of them and projects the likely outcome ahead in time.

Without working themselves into a FRENZY over BOOGIEMENZ.

I think Pat's assessment of our status quo is pretty close, but I disagree with his remedies.

Want to make sure we have very little influence outside our borders?  Bring all of our troops back to the mainland.

I think the real answer is for ordinary citizens to start waking up.  If the citizens of this country don't want to change course, it won't happen.

Quoted: I think Pat's assessment of our status quo is pretty close, but I disagree with his remedies. Want to make sure we have very little influence outside our borders?  Bring all of our troops back to the mainland. I think the real answer is for ordinary citizens to start waking up.  If the citizens of this country don't want to change course, it won't happen.

I agree. I think he is trying to get the Sheeple to wake up by scareing them, but they probably won't even read his book.

Also, an even bigger reason for the book coming out now is to influence the elections. Books on all sides seem to be timed to elections.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I heard a bit on NPR with Buchanan plugging his book.  It sounded to me as if he is not entirely unreasonable in his thinking.  Problem is, most folks will only hear what they want and try to make it conform to the political reality they most desire.  It was nice to hear him giving an intelligent and insightful interview and not being badgered into some kind of ideological trap.   Nothing he says in that little blurb really makes my liberal blood boil.  Personally, I think both sides have gone too far in relying on the federal government to be their problem solver.  Once you get past the point of guaranteeing basic human and civil rights of citizens of the various States, the federal government's involvement in social engineering is a farce.  The federal government is far too intrusive into the daily lives of law-abiding citizens.  Many of the divisions that now confront us could be best handled by the States to suit their own citizens.   J. Agreed. The Federal government has gotten too big and powerful. Between a .gov that fails to put America and Americans first and a MSM that has long forgotten what America is supposed to be all about I see little hope of any of the threats we face (militant radical Islam, demographic shifts, multi-national corporations, illegal immigration, currency collapse, loss of manufacturing ability, moral decay, declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations, energy dependency, et., etc.) being addressed, let alone solved. Somehow, just voting for the closest thing to the "right" guy seems like pissing into the wind... Once again another perfect recruit for Buchanan's 'soft fascism'... It's also ironic that you decry a 'loss of manufacturing ability' and a 'declining intellectual development of current and subsequent generations'... My mention of loss of manufacturing ability was really about national security. I've been waiting 3 weeks for a dishwasher part that is made overseas. Many components of our weapons and key infrastructure systems are made offshore. Japan learned that if you are going to get into a big fight you better be able to feed and maintain your own war machine. Keeping unskilled manufacturing in the US - let alone trying to BRING IT BACK - would do more damage to 'intellectual advancement' than you could possibly imagine (Which is probably why you haven't figured out that unskilled MFG = BAD on a national scale).... Ignoring what appears to be a feeble attempt at an insult, I did not say "unskilled". And as far as "intellectual advancement" being served by sending jobs overseas, maybe you have a point. All those left unemployed by the loss of their manufacturing jobs are now advancing their intellects by learning phrases like "Would you like fries with that, sir?" or "Hello, I'm Mike. Sorry to be calling during dinner but I have a wonderful offer for you..." Yeah, let's force companies to keep jobs any 3rd-world idiot can do here in a 1st world country... Let's see how many jobs we can have that can be done by anyone with a 5th grade education... That will be REAL GOOD for economic development...

Or perhaps we could just not force companies to outsource by hitting them with excessive taxes and regulations? As far as those with a 5th grade education (and we have way too many of those), at least they would be working and contributing instead of becoming burdens on society. And work is good for the soul.    

only way to bring manufacturing jobs back would be to take away the unions coerciveness. dont give them special priviledge and repeal all the special interest union backed labor laws, wagner acts, etc that are unconstitutional anyway. cut regulations and taxes on business, allow a free market, and work to legalize competition in money.