Buchanan: McCain is ‘Bush on steroids.’
By on Jan 22nd, 2008 at 10:20 am
Buchanan: McCain is ‘Bush on steroids.’
On Hardball yesterday, guests Stephen A. Smith and Pat Buchanan discussed the foreign policy impact of electing either Rudy Giuliani or John McCain. Buchanan cautioned that McCain will have a neoconservative attitude:
He’s very bellicose. He’s got that very in-your-face attitude Bush does. I think we could very well be at war with Iran. That’s one of the reasons I’ve always been skeptical of McCain. I think he’s Bush on steroids.
[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2008/01/pbsasrd.320.240.flv]
Commenting on Giuliani, Smith said, “If he becomes the next President of the United States, that would be an absolute disaster. … There would no foreign relations whatsoever.” Buchanan added that Rudy’s foreign policy is actually “Norman Podhoretz’s foreign policy.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Bucanan is correct.
Nothing else to say.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:24 amFor the life of me I can’t understand why MSNBC had the ESPN LOUDmouth Stephen A. Smith on air. Was Sharpton not available? Was Smith comparing the crossover dribbles of Bush and McCain?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:25 amBuchanan is correct on this one. McCain would translate into 4 more years of a bullying foreign policy which this country cannot withstand. Bush’s nonsensical policies have brought this country to it’s precipice of doom this month – by the elections, who knows? Maybe by then we won’t even recognize our country any longer, thanks to Bush and people will repudiate McCain since Bush is obviously this man’s “idol”.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:28 amDoes MSNBC think that just because Olbermann was able to make the crossover from sports to news that everyone can do it?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:28 amHe’s also correctomundo about Rudyshitco. Rudy doesn’t have the first “clue” about how to run anything – his own personal life is a prime example. As far as running New York, any mafioso thug could do what he did there. I’m appalled that Rudy’s even in the race at this point, to tell you the truth. For this man to actually believe his own lies and spin about himself indicates the profound level of his own mental illness.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:30 amBuchanan pegged it. McCain has never, EVER been against any war. He’s a warmonger, pure and simple. And Guiliani doesn’t know his a** from a hole in the ground when it comes to foreign policy, and Podhoretz is a neocon pig.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:30 amBuchanan may be a kook in a lot of his rhetoric, but there are times when he makes a lot of sense and I find myself (perish the thought) agreeing with his general thought process. He’s correct on this one, IMHO.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:34 amFor the life of me I can’t understand why MSNBC had the ESPN LOUDmouth Stephen A. Smith on air. Was Sharpton not available? Was Smith comparing the crossover dribbles of Bush and McCain?
Comment by Badmoodman — January 22, 2008 @ 10:25 am
No
Just the dribble that plummets from their chins when they speak……
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:35 amAnd Guiliani doesn’t know his a** from a hole in the ground when it comes to foreign policy, and Podhoretz is a neocon pig.
Comment by lefttown — January 22, 2008 @ 10:30 am
You mean being mayor of New York on 9/11 doesn’t count as foreign policy experience? Only cause 9iu11ani was mayor of New York on 9/11. He may have mentioned this once or twice or nine or eleven times in his campaign for President of Florida.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:36 amSometimes Buchannon says coherent things. It’s really strange.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:37 amI have always respected Buchanan as an honest man — one who will say what he believes no matter how politically incorrect it is, or whether it fits the GOP agenda or not. I almost never agree with the man, and quite frankly his views scare me a good portion of the time, but I will say he’s honest.
What surprises me is that he says “I think we could very well be at war with Iran. That’s one of the reasons I’ve always been skeptical of McCain.” — like war with Iran is a bad thing. I would have thought he would be beating the Iran war drums the loudest. What gives?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:46 amSometimes Buchannon says coherent things. It’s really strange.
Comment by ForTruth — January 22, 2008 @ 10:37 am
Lets see, Buchannon is speaking coherently and all of the world’s markets are tanking.
is it the end of the world?
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:47 amRead today’s New York Times for a good, close look at 9iu11ani and
the ‘compassion’ he showed New Yorkers who didn’t roll over & play dead for him.
Scary shit, indeed.
McPain is insane. Anyone who thinks Joe LIEberman would be a good running mate is running out of sanity.
America doesn’t need Israel on the ticket, Joe, they already have us in their pocket.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:48 amMM: “I would have thought he (Buchanan) would be beating the Iran war drums the loudest. What gives?”
– - Buchanan has maintained this Iraq “adventure” was a mistake too. Pat does have his lucid moments.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:49 amI would have thought he would be beating the Iran war drums the loudest. What gives?
Comment by missmolly — January 22, 2008 @ 10:46 am
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then?
Or it could be that Buchanan knows which way the wind is blowing and that the Iraq war is still unpopular, if off the public agenda temporarily, and that the upcoming Iran War will be even more unpopular with the 700 Club set.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:54 amBigfoot I think there is an enemy under your bed.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:58 amdid Buchanan suddenly find Jebus?
don’t be fooled…..these repuglican sycophants aren’t turncoats…they are smarmy infiltrators and undercover turncoats.
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:58 amI heard this yesterday. Buchanan just talking usually makes my teeth hurt, like when some one runs nails across a chalkboard, but that one made me laugh
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:00 amGeesh. A reichwing kook like Pat Buchanan acting like he’s the voice of sanity??
Spare me. Lock ‘em ALL up — in nice safe rubber rooms where they can’t hurt anybody.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:04 amAnyone who thinks Joe LIEberman would be a good running mate is running out of sanity.
Comment by Zimzone — January 22, 2008 @ 10:48 am
Yeah, Gore is nuts, alright……
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:05 amIt scares me when I agree with Buchanan.
What I am left wondering, Why does Pat want Romney to win? Maybe his apocolyptic view requires him? Considering all three of them will do everything they can to bring us to WWIII, what does it matter?
Then again, if Pat started touting Obama for President, then I’d be truly scared.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:06 amWhat surprises me is that he says “I think we could very well be at war with Iran. That’s one of the reasons I’ve always been skeptical of McCain.†— like war with Iran is a bad thing. I would have thought he would be beating the Iran war drums the loudest. What gives?
Comment by missmolly — January 22, 2008 @ 10:46 am
It should be no surprise at all. Buchanan not only opposed the Iraq invasion, he opposed the Gulf War of 2001. He does not believe that the US is best served by trying to police the planet. It’s one of those rare opinions in which Pat and I have anything in common.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:18 amIt is really a funny story. Acting as though the ramblings of these seriously disturbed folks is news, or has any meaning though, what are you thinking?
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:22 amMay I suggest a category for you? “meltdown” These folks won’t have anything to do shortly. Why don’t you assist them?
The whole group hasn’t had an original idea since Nixon, so why not put these folks up against facts and watch how fast they disappear like the fog?
What has the world come to when PAT FRIGGIN’ BUCHANAN is the only one making sense?
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:24 amI supported Pat Buchanan’s presidential campaign twice, but in his old age, he’e become more and more isolationist.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — January 22, 2008 @ 10:45 am
He has always been an isolationist, idiot.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:33 am“It should be no surprise at all. Buchanan not only opposed the Iraq invasion, he opposed the Gulf War of 2001.”
You mean “1991,” gummitch. Not “2001.” But you are otherwise correct. Buchanan (and Robert Novak) opposed Desert Storm back in the day.
Buchanan also opposed the US/NATO operations in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:38 am21 – FWIW, Keltoi – I did think Gore was nuts for picking such a completely insane running mate…I loathed ol’ holy Joe even then.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:41 amBuchanan also opposed the US/NATO operations in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s.
Comment by Exley — January 22, 2008 @ 11:38 am
As I said, Buchanan has always been an isolationist.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:42 amHe has also always been racist, he just slips less on the air now days.
21 – FWIW, Keltoi – I did think Gore was nuts for picking such a completely insane running mate…I loathed ol’ holy Joe even then.
Comment by Leftside Annie — January 22, 2008 @ 11:41 am
As I. When Gore announced Lie-man, my first words were “WTF is he thinking?”
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:45 amYou mean “1991,†gummitch. Not “2001.†But you are otherwise correct. Buchanan (and Robert Novak) opposed Desert Storm back in the day.
Buchanan also opposed the US/NATO operations in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 1990s.
Comment by Exley — January 22, 2008 @ 11:38 am
Oops. I knew that looked wrong. But what’s a decade here and there?
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:48 amIt seems a bit far-fetched to me that McCain would actually pick Lieberman as Veep. Sec of Def, maybe, but not Veep, for the same reason Edwards won’t be considered by Hill or Obama. There are very few second acts in the Big Game.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:53 amYeah, Gore is nuts, alright……
Comment by Keltoi — January 22, 2008 @ 11:05 am
Gorte didn’t choose lieberman, the DLC did. Keltoi, fact-free as usual.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:55 amBucky is spot on here, McCain would keep us in Iraq indefinitely, probably not blink an eye nuking Iran.
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:58 amAnd he’s the odds on favorite to win the repuke nomination.
And he’s the odds on favorite to win the repuke nomination.
Comment by RUCerious — January 22, 2008 @ 11:58 am
Want another 9/11? Vote Republican, the only party that consistently fails to defend and protect America.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:10 pmGorte didn’t choose lieberman, the DLC did. Keltoi, fact-free as usual.
Comment by Lefty Patriot — January 22, 2008 @ 11:55 am
Wow – I didn’t realize it was a “fact” that St. Al is such a party tool he didn’t even get to pick his own running mate – the things I learn here!
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:10 pmWow – I didn’t realize it was a “fact†that St. Al is such a party tool he didn’t even get to pick his own running mate – the things I learn here!
Comment by Keltoi — January 22, 2008 @ 12:10 pm
Really? Like Cheney being sent out to find a veep?
Please, there’s no machine like the repig machine. don’t forget your cheif fool and tool, george bush. thanks for 9/11, repigs! You’ll never live that down, keltoi. 9/11, yours to carry for the rest of history. abject, utter failure.Now, watch the bush economy melt before your eyes.
LOSER.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:21 pmFor the life of me I can’t understand why MSNBC had the ESPN LOUDmouth Stephen A. Smith on air. Was Sharpton not available? Was Smith comparing the crossover dribbles of Bush and McCain?
Comment by Badmoodman — January 22, 2008 @ 10:25 am
—–
Sports commentary is much more difficult than political commentary. If you don’t know what the heck your talking about on ESPN, they find someone who does pretty quickly.
All you have to do on cable “news” is repeat the same thing everyone else is saying.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:26 pmBuchanan: McCain is ‘Bush on steroids.
Does that mean he actually did make the chess team in high school ?
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:26 pmSteven A Smith? On a political show?
Ooooooookay. Next we’ll see Hannity anchoring Sportscenter.
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:29 pmOops. I knew that looked wrong. But what’s a decade here and there?
Comment by gummitch
Just great, gum.
Now Exley thinks he won a debate. :)
January 22nd, 2008 at 12:41 pmBooks and rifles…suuuuure.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:01 pmYou need to read some of his Nixonian Era stuff, dufus. How many of his books do you own?
Me? All of them.
Comment by O. Bigfoot — January 22, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
You own every Buchanan book?
No wonder you are so messed up.
Take a look at his platform when he ran under the “Reform Party” ticket. Plus his stances against every military action in the last 30 years.
January 22nd, 2008 at 1:06 pmU.Yeti.
Got kids or grandkids that visit the house?
Storing weapons and ammo under the bed is a real dangerous, idiotic thing to do.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:03 pmYou know that, don’t you?
Sports commentary is much more difficult than political commentary.
See Limbaugh, Rush and Miller, Dennis…
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:05 pmPat Buchanan, a bigot posing behind the guise of libertarianism and key architect of the Iraq=Israel’s war myth, or course is quick to write off ANY pro-war stance as misguided or skewed. Has CAP become so starved for ammunition against the Republican platform that they are stooping to use the arguments of the close-minded fanatic, Pat “Our culture is superior because our religion is Christianity and that is the truth that makes men free” Buchanan?
I guess that these scrappy stretch tactics are emblematic of the petty Democratic grovelling that we saw in the debate last night.
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:40 pmSince when did Buchanan become so pro-peace and anti-Bush all of a sudden? It must be his dementia kicking in….
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:31 pmI’ve always found Buchanan to be a sensible voice on foreign policy, although he doesn’t talk about it very much. Although many of you probably wouldn’t even consider reading a book by him, I do recommend “Republic, Not an Empire”, a history and treatise on colonialism and intervention into other countries.
January 22nd, 2008 at 5:51 pmBuchanan’s an anomaly. A right-wing conservative who actually (sometimes) makes sense. Either he’s schizo or one of the few righties who truly are “conservatives” and occasionally reason things out. If the latter is true, it’s too bad more of the right-wing are not like him. Another possibility is that Buchanan saw the need and has carved himself out a niche…
January 23rd, 2008 at 1:40 amO. Bigfoot said, “I supported Pat Buchanan’s presidential campaign twice, but in his old age, he’e become more and more isolationist.
Isolationism only works if your enemies stay at home and mind their own business. Something it has been proven, with deadly consequences, they simply will not do.”
hey, are you Iraqi or Iranian? b/c the last time i checked America’s been interfering in those countries for decades so it’s hard to tell from your message who should stay home and mind their own business.
January 29th, 2008 at 5:28 pm