The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
Biden Becomes a Bernie Sanders Democrat?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

“We’ve got the president of the United States on our side,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

“Got 96% of the members of the Democratic caucus in the House on our side. We got all but two senators at this point in the Democratic caucus on our side. We’re going to win this thing.”

The socialist senator from Vermont may be overly optimistic about how the party deadlock on Capitol Hill unfolds. But about the balance of forces inside the party, and the direction where it is headed, Sanders is probably not wrong.

Progressive Democrats won the week.

President Joe Biden confirmed it by casting his lot with the liberal-left on the sequencing of the \$1.2 trillion infrastructure bill and \$3.5 trillion social safety net bill pending in Congress.

When Biden went to the Hill Friday, it was thought he was coming to rescue and liberate the Senate-passed infrastructure bill being held hostage by progressives until they got their way on the larger bill.

Progressives had threatened to sink the roads-and-bridges bill in Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s House, unless they received solid assurances that both houses would simultaneously take up and approve the \$3.5 trillion bill.

When Biden reached the Hill, however, he threw in with the hostage-takers. He asked for a delay in House passage of his own infrastructure bill, until the demands of the progressives were addressed and met.

Pelosi agreed and has put off any House vote on the infrastructure bill until the end of October.

Biden had ditched the Biden Democrats and cast his lot with Sanders & Co. Let’s hold off voting on my own infrastructure bill, until we can also deliver what the progressives demand of us, he was saying.

The real impediment blocking progress, Biden said, was two senators, Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, who are blocking the resolution of the issue, which is that all Democrats should agree to enact both bills.

By capitulating to the progressives’ demand — which translates to, “Both bills or no bill!” — Biden revealed where he thinks the power in the party resides, where the future is, and what he wants as his legacy.

This is not the first time Biden has moved left to accommodate a rising consensus. As vice president, though a self-proclaimed devout Catholic, Biden stepped out in front of Barack Obama to endorse same-sex marriage.

During the 2020 campaign, Biden abandoned a lifetime belief about abortion and pledged to remove the Hyde Amendment — a restriction on federal funding of abortions — from federal law.

Cradle Catholic Joe has become our most pro-abortion president.

But while the moderate-versus-progressive faceoff could still end in a rout for the left, the probability is that the infrastructure bill becomes law and the social safety net bill ends up between Manchin’s \$1.5 trillion ceiling and its current \$3.5 trillion price tag.

One way to solve the sticker-price problem is through subterfuge — reduce the duration from, say, 10 years to five, in the expectation that no future GOP administration would terminate an entitlement program upon which millions of Americans had come to depend for half a decade.

As Milton Friedman reminded us, “Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.”

Nevertheless, this is truly the “transformative” legislation that The New York Times depicted as providing “a cradle-to-grave reweaving of a social safety net.”

This Build Back Better bill would provide family and medical leave for illness and the birth of a child, affordable child care during infancy, two years of universal pre-kindergarten, child credits and federal income tax credits, and two years in a community college.

If passed in its present form, government will have an ever-present role in the life of a child, almost from conception until his or her early 20s.

This would also include established programs of welfare, Medicaid, aid to education, subsidized housing, rent supplements, school breakfasts and lunches, and food stamps.

If this bill does not die in the fall, what will America look like a few years hence?

Government will have expanded in both size and the numbers of employees, and in relation to a shrinking private sector. A panoply of new programs will expand eternally with the cost growing inexorably. The dependency of U.S. citizens on their government will grow.

And this doesn’t even touch upon another aspect.

ORDER IT NOW

The IRS is to be expanded, and corporate taxes, estate taxes and capital gains taxes are to rise. Government will also step in to force a shift away from coal and oil and gas, with which the country is hugely endowed, to wager America’s future on solar and wind.

Hopefully, Manchin and Sinema will employ the leverage they have to prevent the worst of the damage this historically high level of spending — with inflation already rising above 5% — will do.

But as to whether the Democrats are a Bernie party or a Biden party, Joe settled that Friday with his capitulation.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

 
Hide 34 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Buchanan’s assigned to the Beltway Beat. This column’s like that of a burned out sportswriter, feigning excitement about just another game.

    • Disagree: Jokem
  2. Emslander says:

    And a Haitian on every lawn.

    • Agree: ruralguy
    • Replies: @KenH
    , @true.enough
  3. KenH says:
    @Emslander

    And a Haitian on every lawn.

    We could all have real life lawn jockeys on our front lawns.

  4. Just more evidence that Joe Biden has no intention of running for re-election. The goal of Biden and Democrats is to accomplish as much as they can before Republicans retake Congress in 2023 and the White House in 2025. Let in as many illegals as possible so there are too many to ever round up and deport; making it a fait accompli the legalization of illegal aliens. Biden will announce he will not seek reelection after the Dems get slaughtered next year.

    • Agree: Jokem
    • Replies: @Heymrguda
  5. SafeNow says:

    “where the power in his party resides”

    But why? Three reasons: 1. The voters, which include the new-demographic voting reinforcements, will vote for whoever gives the most free stuff; 2. Being moderate = being Trump, a supremicist, and a racist; and 3. Being moderate means “activists” might get in your face; your street; your bathroom.

    And speaking of “in your face” I note thst the Sinema and Manchin confrontations coincided with the beginning of the new supreme court term. Don’t think for minute that the escalation escaped the notice of the justices. This will be a factor in their decision making. There’s an old saying that the Supreme Court justices read the newspaper headlines.

  6. Heymrguda says:
    @Max Maxwell

    As you say the mid terms and the 2024 election are, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant. The damage is done.

    • Agree: Max Maxwell
    • Replies: @Dr. Charles Fhandrich
  7. Spending to oblivion,
    Government god contagion.

  8. @Heymrguda

    That’s the problem with the Republican party. For the last Sixty of so years, they have always “allowed” the damage to be done. Then, when it is done, for all practical purposes they wait for the next stage——-where the damage is done again. Conservatives conserve nothing, nor have they ever accomplished anything that would fundamentally improve this nation. It is like a reality show, where Republicans win and then, Democrats suddenly negate all of progress the right has made. This has been the pattern now, beginning right after the second world war.

    Ever since the defeat of the authoritarian governments after WW 2, the left has slowly and somewhat unsystematically but never the less, consistently, gained power until they are now threatening the U.S. in ways never before imagined.

    • Replies: @John Regan
    , @Reg Cæsar
  9. @Dr. Charles Fhandrich

    Ever since the defeat of the authoritarian governments after WW 2, the left has slowly and somewhat unsystematically but never the less, consistently, gained power until they are now threatening the U.S. in ways never before imagined.

    Most of the ways they threaten it actually were imagined because they were already present in early stages in the interwar years at the latest.

    Transgenderism for example isn’t as new as it seems. It was pioneered by people like Magnus Hirschfeld in Weimar Germany. And of course the ideas of Count Kalergi which proved so strangely prophetic were published at the same time. Whether you believe he was in on the deal or just a perceptive observer.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Magnus_Hirschfeld
    https://infogalactic.com/info/Richard_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi

    The regulatory capture of the judiciary and Federal buraucracy to serve the aims of minoritarianism and its masters was accomplished through the New Deal. The name to look for here is one Felix Frankfurter.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Felix_Frankfurter

    And so on.

    It’s extremely interesting to read old conservative books or magazines like the American Mercury (Available for free right here on this very site courtesy of Mr. Ron Unz!). They noticed a lot back then that never made it into the history books. And the smarter writers among them in fact predicted almost everything we now suffer as the simple natural consequences of what was happening in their own times.

    Too bad we didn’t listen to them.

    • Thanks: Dr. Charles Fhandrich
  10. I agree with Pat on some of this. And in the aggregate, the bills proposed spend too much money without raising taxes and/or cutting spending elsewhere to make up for it. This leads immediately to higher fed gov debt and thus higher annual interest payments on that debt. It also contributes to increasing rent/price inflation and the weakening of the dollar.

    Dems COULD offset \$150 billion-plus by closing most of our far-flung foreign military bases, and another chunk by slashing programs such as sitting-ducks aka aircraft carriers. They never make a serious effort, though, to stop the military-industrial complex from wasting our money and enlarging our debt for no good reason.

    As for the specific programs within the bill that I could readily support if they were actually fully paid for by military/war spending cuts and higher taxes on plutocrats, I’d like to say to Pat, “OH NO, paid leave for illness?? Paid leave to be with a new baby? A tax credit big enough to actually help raise children well and without constant anxiety? The horror!” Easy for a “man” to say who has never raised children and never had to worry about money for decades.

    • Thanks: mark green
  11. The West is one big Jewish-controlled dog obedience school for goyim as toyim.

    • Agree: mark green
  12. @Emslander

    Who do voodoo? You do voodoo!

    Speaking of Haitians on every lawn, I’m old enough to remember those Lawn Jockey statues around the neighborhood. I wonder where I can get one of those nowadays?

  13. Ed Case says:

    The incredible thing is that the United States is so wealthy that it has been able to put all nonWhites on a cradle to grave Dole for the last 70 years and yet it still survives.

    • Agree: Max Maxwell
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  14. TGD says:

    The burning question that I have is will the “social safety net bill” include a provision for funding “midnight basketball?”

  15. @RadicalCenter

    Good Lord. No idea Buchanan was childless.

    And while I’m here, Biden a Bernie Sanders Democrat? If only! I’d very much like Medicare for all, thank you. Lots of things start falling in place once it’s clear that everybody better help pull the wagon, and it becomes clear who the wagon-riders are.

    Nationalism and socialism are a package deal.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    , @RadicalCenter
  16. ruralguy says:

    The United States now draws its inspiration from a guy, Bernie Sanders, who spent the first 1/2 of his adult life in a dark basement watching a film strip about the Marxist Eugene Debs over and over, while living off falsified unemployment claims. 96% of the Democrats in the House support this guy’s intended transformation of our government into a communist paradise, by voting for his ~\$5-6 Trillion spending package.

  17. USA1943 says:

    Communist and Paradise are Contradictory Words, Show Me A Communist Nation that is/was a Paradise.

    • Replies: @Jokem
  18. Jokem says:
    @USA1943

    Always a paradise for the party members who are not sent to the gulag.

  19. @RadicalCenter

    That’s the thing no one talks about. Investing in families to raise kids should be seen as a long run investment rather than an ongoing government expense. However, globalist policies (supported by all main stream parties in the west) take the view that importing cheap labour is more efficient because it’s inexpensive (to the government) plus immigrants prevent wage inflation.

    China has had the luck to see how globalist neo-liberal policies have played out in the west, and is now prioritising investments in making family formation easier so that the population replacement rate doesn’t fall below zero.

    • Thanks: RadicalCenter
  20. @Dr. Charles Fhandrich

    That’s the problem with the Republican party. For the last Sixty of so years, they have always “allowed” the damage to be done.

    Because the alternative is this:

  21. @The Anti-Gnostic

    Nationalism and socialism are a package deal.

    Thanks for the warning. Is your Yugo still running?

    • Disagree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  22. @The Anti-Gnostic

    Well said, sir. But I’d prefer “a generous welfare state and nationalism”, not socialism. I don’t think it’s efficient or wise to have governments own most means of production and distribution, at all.

    I’d go for private ownership of most means of production and distribution. Market competition, the profit motive, and freedom to innovate and be rewarded, are all important and morally unobjectionable.

    Where we need public ownership is our God-given natural resources under the ground. But the government can never be trusted with the money flowing from those resources. ALL profit from the sale of water, oil, natural gas, metals and minerals should be paid equally to US citizens age 21 and over.

    Exclude only those citizens who are incarcerated for committing a violent or serious felony (certainly murder of whatever degree, forcible rape, child molestation, providing narcotics to minors). That’s a nearly-Universal Basic Income funded by something placed here by God (or Nature, if you prefer) that nobody created, invented, designed, or “produced” — without any taxes or borrowing.

    Of course, I would use the UBI to eliminate many other federal government “programs”, agencies, and subsidies. The kind of people in Congress now who would pass a UBI would just tack on on top of the existing welfare state bureaucracy.

    I’d also like to see a large network of publicly owned factories and laboratories making commonly used generic medications and providing them to all US Citizens at cost. We should not be raped by profiteering Big Pharma corporations to get these medications. Nor should we put our health at the mercy of a long, fragile supply chain and the goodwill of countries indifferent or hostile to us.

    Similarly, common sense suggests that we should build a publicly owned network of strategic reserves: drinkable water, oil, and natural gas, for starters.

    Other than those, I do not favor socialism. Something like what I’ve described is close to the “happy medium”, it seems.

    How about Social Nationalism?

  23. @Reg Cæsar

    Don’t have a Yugo, but can’t afford the medical care that I need despite a salary much higher than average here in the USA and a “good” medical insurance policy.

    And if I lose a job, the state unemployment benefits (which I and my employer pay for) don’t come with medical insurance or care and won’t be enough to cover COBRA continuation of our medical insurance for very long.

    Thanks for asking, though.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
  24. @RadicalCenter

    The same folks who brought you Medicare also opened the floodgates to fill positions “Americans won’t do”. Not very nationalist of the socialists, was it?

  25. @Reg Cæsar

    Reg, of course it wasn’t very nationalist or good for Americans. You and I would agree on that, as on numerous other things.

    But since I oppose the US regime utterly, and they are anti-nationalist as well as anti-family, anti-white, and anti-freedom, they have nothing to do with me or my proposals and I am not to blame for them any more than you are.

    Nor are our rulers actually socialist. Even that might be less bad than what we have: some of us pay exorbitant taxes, small businesses labor under absurd regulations and harassment, yet we are still ruled and exploited and abused by big corporations, banks, big influential corporate landlords, and other plutocrats. In other words, we have most of the costs of more-collectivized systems, but few of the possible direct benefits.

    I’d end mass immigration, legal and illegal, by any forceful means necessary. I’d use the UBI to replace much of the federal welfare-state bureaucracy (helping most Americans MORE than the current dysfunctional and crooked system, while crippling the political power of the government-employee unions). I’d disqualify noncitizens from all taxpayer-funded benefits, federal or state (hello, scumbags in California government, I’m talking about you).

    Does any of that sound like our current rulers and abusers? As the guy playing Biden might say, “come on, man. I’m against, you know, the thing, and they’re for it.”

    Social nationalism now.

  26. @Reg Cæsar

    PS – I have no problem with something much MORE generous and helpful than Medicare and Medicaid — for all US Citizens. But it needs to include the people who actually pay taxes, rather than benefitting mostly net-tax-consumers and the poor like our current system. Right now many of us pay and get shit.

    It needs to exclude non-citizens. (Yeah, I’m thinking of the scumbags here in California government, who actually just used our money to give “free” daycare, “free” dental care, and now “pandemic” “relief checks” to f—— NON-citizens, including illegal aliens, but not to my wife and me.)

    It needs to exclude people who choose to bear more children after they are already on long-term taxpayer support.

    Social nationalism now: demand economic security for all peaceful English-speaking US Citizens. Put the big banks and big corporations last. Pay the American people directly from natural-resource revenues and excise-tax revenues, abolish most government bureaucracies and “programs.” Put American families and family businesses first.

  27. @RadicalCenter

    I’m actually of the opinion that government should be restricted to management of the very few, actual public goods.

    But it would be fun to get Medicare 4 All and hear the lamentations of the social democrats as they realize where the books aren’t balancing.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  28. Corvinus says:
    @RadicalCenter

    What you propose, and what I agree with in principle, is socialism.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  29. @Ed Case

    That’s a pretty absurd statement when it comes to Asian-Americans.

    Your statement is closest to accurate with regard to Africans in the USA, who are overwhelmingly an economic and cultural dead weight.

    • Replies: @Ed Case
  30. @Corvinus

    Hey Corvinus — As much as it would be kinda nice to agree with you for a change 😉 and we certainly do agree somewhat here, there seems to be some daylight between our general outlooks.

    Doesn’t socialism require government or worker ownership of all means of production? I take it that you’re for government ownership or management of all industries, or most industries? I’m not.

    I’m also not in favor of taxing the first home of anyone up to a point. Local (not state or federal) property tax on second homes and investment properties, sure, not to be punitive but to raise revenue locally. But no tax on a family’s first (or only) home so that the government can never take it from them and they can feel secure over generations if they wish.

    As for income tax, I’d phase it out for all but the plutocrats. Whoever is the top 1% of household income in a given year should be heavily taxed on the top portion of their income. Part of the reason I say this is because so many people at that level are non-productive, exploitative, and abusive — real-estate and financial speculators, usurious lenders, manipulators, bigtime corporate landlords grinding us down under unreasonable rents, Big Pharma executives (and a few thousand massive shareholders) raking in exorbitant prices, etc.

    Let the other 99% keep their earnings free from federal and state income tax.

    Government should be our vehicle to actively protect and help smaller family businesses and families themselves, and yes, also truly productive or innovative or helpful entrepreneurs — but cut massive, disloyal (nation-less) politically connected corporations down to size. Far from huge corporations having the advantage and the ear (and pockets) of legislators and regulators, it should be they who are actively disfavored and taxed to prevent them from owning and controlling everything.

    Anyway, what do you think of the proposal i like to flog about a national public bank that directly helps all US citizens? A national public bank that cuts the legs out from under the rapacious lenders and frees Americans from much of their crushing debt burden. The public bank can do that by refinancing our home mortgage loans (one home per person), SMALL-business loans, vehicle loans (up to the value of the median new vehicle only), student loans (undergraduate only), medical loans, and of course the f——g credit cards all at zero percent interest.

    The lenders who have been leeching off us should be grateful to get their principal back. They can survive without the interest. But this proposal doesn’t entail confiscation of their property or impairment of anyone’s right to contract. I don’t think that’s socialism, but it helps everyone in a provable, sustainable way and maybe we could agree on that one too.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  31. Ed Case says:
    @RadicalCenter

    That’s a pretty absurd statement when it comes to Asian-Americans.

    Asians tend to self sufficiency and criminal activity such as Tax Evasion, Illegal Banking, Drug Running, Organised Prostitution,Illegal Gambling, Loan Sharking and Money Laundering, all of which are either lightly policed due to their Asian-ness or not policed at all.

    This has also been happening for longer than non Whites have been receiving
    their cradle to grave dole.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  32. @Ed Case

    Also not true of most asian-americans by far. Absurd again. I don’t want most of ‘em here, and find many of them dislikable or unfriendly, but we’re entitled only to our own opinions, not our own facts.

    But you’ve already changed the subject and backtracked from your original absurd statement that all “nonwhites” are on or have been on a cradle-to-grave dole for 70 years.

    Now, my preferred immigration policy would admit a very small fraction of the non-European immigrants that our rulers are admitting nowadays; round up and deport illegal aliens by the millions and prosecute and imprison people who knowingly employ them; end “birthright” citizenship; shoot people illegally invading our country against our wishes; remove all federal funding from illegal-alien sanctuary cities/states; prohibit the use of foreign languages in most domestic government programs; seriously enforce a written and spoken english test and US history test for residency and citizenship applicants; render residents-by-investment permanently ineligible for citizenship; require 25 years as a legal permanent resident before being eligible to apply for citizenship, not five years or less as now, etc.

    The only Asians or anyone else nonEuropean eligible for citizenship here should be people marrying native-born US Citizens (not naturalized citizens), or MAYBE people making a very large donation and investment into our country (not the paltry amount currently required for residency by investment). These two categories together wouldn’t even constitute 3-5% of the flood of many millions of Asians we’ve been allowing to settle here.

    We might profitably let well-screened people pay for long-term legal residency here so that they can start and operate one of a very limited number of types of business — a restaurant, a school teaching their language, or a medical practice that agrees to provide substantial free care to US citizens in the USA along with for-profit care — and treat them in a respectful, welcoming fashion. But never make them eligible to become citizens, attain political power, and start changing our governmental system, laws, schools, and culture.

    But I don’t need to make obnoxious and obviously false generalizations about “all” asians or “all” non-whites who immigrate here to make these points.

  33. @The Anti-Gnostic

    Because we’d attribute the massive and growing federal government debt only to Medicare For All and ignore the even more massive amount our rulers have squandered on endless wars and occupations? Okay.

    I’d gladly cut \$400 Billion in annual military spending and spend half that amount to lower the Medicare eligibility age and lower Medicare premiums. Alternately, send half the amount saved in equal shares to all US Citizens age 21 and over (excluding people serving a felony prison sentence) as a small universal basic income. (Simply closing most of our far-flung foreign military bases and housing the troops at home instead, would save \$100 billion per year.)

    The other half we’d simply not spend at all, given that the fed gov already has a huge debt and is running huge annual deficits to increase it.

    Most Americans would vote for either of these referenda — drastically cutting military/war spending to directly help Americans by giving them medical care or a basic income … if they were allowed to vote directly.

    Moving towards more widespread and generous medical coverage for US citizens is fine as long as it is paid for in large part with spending cuts elsewhere.

  34. Corvinus says:
    @RadicalCenter

    “Doesn’t socialism require government or worker ownership of all means of production?”

    Yes. But socialism also incorporates the programs you listed.

    “I take it that you’re for government ownership or management of all industries, or most industries? I’m not.”

    Neither am I.

    “I’m also not in favor of taxing the first home of anyone up to a point. Local (not state or federal) property tax on second homes and investment properties, sure, not to be punitive but to raise revenue locally. But no tax on a family’s first (or only) home so that the government can never take it from them and they can feel secure over generations if they wish.”

    I absolutely agree.

    “As for income tax, I’d phase it out for all but the plutocrats. Whoever is the top 1% of household income in a given year should be heavily taxed on the top portion of their income.”

    In an ideal world, no American pays income tax who makes 250k individual/family. Then, it is a graduated rate, with loopholes closed.

    “Part of the reason I say this is because so many people at that level are non-productive, exploitative, and abusive — real-estate and financial speculators, usurious lenders, manipulators, bigtime corporate landlords grinding us down under unreasonable rents, Big Pharma executives (and a few thousand massive shareholders) raking in exorbitant prices, etc.”

    That is a sweeping generalization.

    “Government should be our vehicle to actively protect and help smaller family businesses and families themselves”

    I agree.

    “and yes, also truly productive or innovative or helpful entrepreneurs”

    No True Scotsman Fallacy. How does one even objectively define “truly productive”?

    “Far from huge corporations having the advantage and the ear (and pockets) of legislators and regulators, it should be they who are actively disfavored and taxed to prevent them from owning and controlling everything.”

    Corporate personhood must end with a constitutional amendment.

    “Anyway, what do you think of the proposal i like to flog about a national public bank that directly helps all US citizens? A national public bank that cuts the legs out from under the rapacious lenders and frees Americans from much of their crushing debt burden. The public bank can do that by refinancing our home mortgage loans (one home per person), SMALL-business loans, vehicle loans (up to the value of the median new vehicle only), student loans (undergraduate only), medical loans, and of course the f——g credit cards all at zero percent interest.”

    I agree, but the devil is in the details. How would your proposal even come to fruition?

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Hidden Information in Our Government Archives
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
How America was neoconned into World War IV
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.