Pat Buchanan: Fire-breathing Racist

Robert – I don’t agree with your analysis, and I don’t agree with your assessment of Buchanan’s motives. Calling him a “delusional racist” in one sentence and, in the next, announcing that “America’s rainbow is dominated by a beautiful shade of brown” is transparently irrational.
MLS

Robert – I don’t agree with your analysis, and I don’t agree with your assessment of Buchanan’s motives. Calling him a “delusional racist” in one sentence and, in the next, announcing that “America’s rainbow is dominated by a beautiful shade of brown” is transparently irrational.
MLS

Robert – I don’t agree with your analysis, and I don’t agree with your assessment of Buchanan’s motives. Calling him a “delusional racist” in one sentence and, in the next, announcing that “America’s rainbow is dominated by a beautiful shade of brown” is transparently irrational.
MLS

“Dominated by a beautiful shade of brown” is a racist statement. Dominated? Beautiful? Such a statement points to La Raza thinking. The Race. Is that not racist? A thinly veiled Nazi movement, is what it is. They are socialists. They are Mexican nationalists. Instead of Aryan, they promote Mexican. Same goals, different methods. So far.

“Dominated by a beautiful shade of brown” is a racist statement. Dominated? Beautiful? Such a statement points to La Raza thinking. The Race. Is that not racist? A thinly veiled Nazi movement, is what it is. They are socialists. They are Mexican nationalists. Instead of Aryan, they promote Mexican. Same goals, different methods. So far.

“Dominated by a beautiful shade of brown” is a racist statement. Dominated? Beautiful? Such a statement points to La Raza thinking. The Race. Is that not racist? A thinly veiled Nazi movement, is what it is. They are socialists. They are Mexican nationalists. Instead of Aryan, they promote Mexican. Same goals, different methods. So far.

Inasmuch as Mr Reyes sees racism as advocacy of cultural groups other than his own, and yet sees no racism in his own advocacy of these ‘beautiful browns’, I’m happy to proclaim myself a racist for my own group of Americans as an American for what charactoristics made America great and the loss of which will inexorably lead to the whole of humanity suffering.
Mr Reyes’ own cultural ‘Hispanic’ home is one of conquest, imperialism, ritual cannabalism and human sacrifice.
Enjoy it, Senor Reyes…

Inasmuch as Mr Reyes sees racism as advocacy of cultural groups other than his own, and yet sees no racism in his own advocacy of these ‘beautiful browns’, I’m happy to proclaim myself a racist for my own group of Americans as an American for what charactoristics made America great and the loss of which will inexorably lead to the whole of humanity suffering.
Mr Reyes’ own cultural ‘Hispanic’ home is one of conquest, imperialism, ritual cannabalism and human sacrifice.
Enjoy it, Senor Reyes…

Inasmuch as Mr Reyes sees racism as advocacy of cultural groups other than his own, and yet sees no racism in his own advocacy of these ‘beautiful browns’, I’m happy to proclaim myself a racist for my own group of Americans as an American for what charactoristics made America great and the loss of which will inexorably lead to the whole of humanity suffering.
Mr Reyes’ own cultural ‘Hispanic’ home is one of conquest, imperialism, ritual cannabalism and human sacrifice.
Enjoy it, Senor Reyes…

The United States is being urinated on by untrammeled immigration from south of the border. Mexico and other Latin countries are dumping their problems on us. These immigrants, even the law-abiding ones, bring their poverty with them and as a result, play right into the hands of corporate fat-cat employers that Mr. Reyes would probably say that he is at war with, by undermining the cost of American labor.

The immigrants also bring crime, social decay, and other elements intricately bound with their poverty. They tax our safety net and our judicial and law enforcement systems to the breaking point and their presence, in large numbers, threatens the United States’s unique identity.

This is the unvarnished truth, and I don’t think that it’s “racist” for Pat Buchanan or anyone else to speak the truth. But if speaking the truth makes one a “racist”, so be it. We need more “racism” then.

The United States is being urinated on by untrammeled immigration from south of the border. Mexico and other Latin countries are dumping their problems on us. These immigrants, even the law-abiding ones, bring their poverty with them and as a result, play right into the hands of corporate fat-cat employers that Mr. Reyes would probably say that he is at war with, by undermining the cost of American labor.

The immigrants also bring crime, social decay, and other elements intricately bound with their poverty. They tax our safety net and our judicial and law enforcement systems to the breaking point and their presence, in large numbers, threatens the United States’s unique identity.

This is the unvarnished truth, and I don’t think that it’s “racist” for Pat Buchanan or anyone else to speak the truth. But if speaking the truth makes one a “racist”, so be it. We need more “racism” then.

The United States is being urinated on by untrammeled immigration from south of the border. Mexico and other Latin countries are dumping their problems on us. These immigrants, even the law-abiding ones, bring their poverty with them and as a result, play right into the hands of corporate fat-cat employers that Mr. Reyes would probably say that he is at war with, by undermining the cost of American labor.

The immigrants also bring crime, social decay, and other elements intricately bound with their poverty. They tax our safety net and our judicial and law enforcement systems to the breaking point and their presence, in large numbers, threatens the United States’s unique identity.

This is the unvarnished truth, and I don’t think that it’s “racist” for Pat Buchanan or anyone else to speak the truth. But if speaking the truth makes one a “racist”, so be it. We need more “racism” then.

Thanks Robert. You have now turned me into an unabashed racist who believes white people are superior. White men don’t whine and blame others, we just go about our daily lives trying to build the best life we can, with the skills God gave us. If we fail it’s our own fault. If we succeed it’s also our own fault.

But I guess “hispanics” are crybabies, eh? And from your words, they appear too dumb to know what “illegal” means.

Thanks Robert. You have now turned me into an unabashed racist who believes white people are superior. White men don’t whine and blame others, we just go about our daily lives trying to build the best life we can, with the skills God gave us. If we fail it’s our own fault. If we succeed it’s also our own fault.

But I guess “hispanics” are crybabies, eh? And from your words, they appear too dumb to know what “illegal” means.

Thanks Robert. You have now turned me into an unabashed racist who believes white people are superior. White men don’t whine and blame others, we just go about our daily lives trying to build the best life we can, with the skills God gave us. If we fail it’s our own fault. If we succeed it’s also our own fault.

But I guess “hispanics” are crybabies, eh? And from your words, they appear too dumb to know what “illegal” means.

Actually, minorities-overwhelmingly black people-made up about 20% of the population in Colonial America. After the 13 colonies became the USA minorities stayed at that about that percentage , until the USA began receiving great waves of white immigration from mainly Ireland and Germany in the earlier half of the 19th century, and towards the end of the century many more immigrants from eastern and southern Europe.Whites could not have made more than 78-79% of the population in colonial times or in the earlier decades of the 19th century. Where Reyes got his ideas about the population of colonial America is beyond me . (My percentage comes from either Garraty’s The American Nation or Gay’s The American People, can’t recall which , but probably Gay.)

Actually, minorities-overwhelmingly black people-made up about 20% of the population in Colonial America. After the 13 colonies became the USA minorities stayed at that about that percentage , until the USA began receiving great waves of white immigration from mainly Ireland and Germany in the earlier half of the 19th century, and towards the end of the century many more immigrants from eastern and southern Europe.Whites could not have made more than 78-79% of the population in colonial times or in the earlier decades of the 19th century. Where Reyes got his ideas about the population of colonial America is beyond me . (My percentage comes from either Garraty’s The American Nation or Gay’s The American People, can’t recall which , but probably Gay.)

Actually, minorities-overwhelmingly black people-made up about 20% of the population in Colonial America. After the 13 colonies became the USA minorities stayed at that about that percentage , until the USA began receiving great waves of white immigration from mainly Ireland and Germany in the earlier half of the 19th century, and towards the end of the century many more immigrants from eastern and southern Europe.Whites could not have made more than 78-79% of the population in colonial times or in the earlier decades of the 19th century. Where Reyes got his ideas about the population of colonial America is beyond me . (My percentage comes from either Garraty’s The American Nation or Gay’s The American People, can’t recall which , but probably Gay.)

It’s important to distinguish the key issue here: legal vs. illegal immigration. The quote you cited looks damning in isolation:
“…in a country 89 or 90% white. I like that country. We didn’t vote to change it.”

Buchanan is saying that we didn’t vote to disproportionately favor legal immigration from central and south America. The increased percentages of immigrants from those countries (Buchanan asserts) are due to illegal immigration (which may have begun decades ago, culminating in offspring who are of course legal). Buchanan is saying that the percentages of whites has gone down relative to other races because the immigration laws have been violated.

Also, when Buchanan says “I like that country,” some infer that he is really saying “I like that white country, and I don’t like a country that is less white.” He may have also meant that he simply liked the country in which he grew up. Whether he liked it for its whiteness or its high regard for enforcement of immigration law remains unclear (at least from the isolated quote you took).

I think it’s possible that Buchanan could have racial issues, but until we get into his mind (or more thoroughly read his literature, or examine his spoken words in greater context) it is difficult to make that determination. I am always suspicious of people who ascribe motivation to others without sufficient evidence to back that claim; after all, it’s far easier to identify and critique a persons stated views rather than their thoughts.

Again, the real issue is illegal vs. legal immigration, not the racial homogeneity of the nation. The debate is about the enforcement of immigration laws (whether it should be done or not), and this is a problem — there should be no debate over whether the law is enforced. It should always be enforced. If you favor increased immigration, then you should join in the debate to relax existing legal restrictions on immigration; that would be legitimate. Instead, you have attacked the messenger at just the same time he has released a book about this very subject; it seems you are out to discredit the message of enforcing the law by discrediting the messenger.

John Dias
Founder, DontMakeHerMad.com

It’s important to distinguish the key issue here: legal vs. illegal immigration. The quote you cited looks damning in isolation:
“…in a country 89 or 90% white. I like that country. We didn’t vote to change it.”

Buchanan is saying that we didn’t vote to disproportionately favor legal immigration from central and south America. The increased percentages of immigrants from those countries (Buchanan asserts) are due to illegal immigration (which may have begun decades ago, culminating in offspring who are of course legal). Buchanan is saying that the percentages of whites has gone down relative to other races because the immigration laws have been violated.

Also, when Buchanan says “I like that country,” some infer that he is really saying “I like that white country, and I don’t like a country that is less white.” He may have also meant that he simply liked the country in which he grew up. Whether he liked it for its whiteness or its high regard for enforcement of immigration law remains unclear (at least from the isolated quote you took).

I think it’s possible that Buchanan could have racial issues, but until we get into his mind (or more thoroughly read his literature, or examine his spoken words in greater context) it is difficult to make that determination. I am always suspicious of people who ascribe motivation to others without sufficient evidence to back that claim; after all, it’s far easier to identify and critique a persons stated views rather than their thoughts.

Again, the real issue is illegal vs. legal immigration, not the racial homogeneity of the nation. The debate is about the enforcement of immigration laws (whether it should be done or not), and this is a problem — there should be no debate over whether the law is enforced. It should always be enforced. If you favor increased immigration, then you should join in the debate to relax existing legal restrictions on immigration; that would be legitimate. Instead, you have attacked the messenger at just the same time he has released a book about this very subject; it seems you are out to discredit the message of enforcing the law by discrediting the messenger.

John Dias
Founder, DontMakeHerMad.com

It’s important to distinguish the key issue here: legal vs. illegal immigration. The quote you cited looks damning in isolation:
“…in a country 89 or 90% white. I like that country. We didn’t vote to change it.”

Buchanan is saying that we didn’t vote to disproportionately favor legal immigration from central and south America. The increased percentages of immigrants from those countries (Buchanan asserts) are due to illegal immigration (which may have begun decades ago, culminating in offspring who are of course legal). Buchanan is saying that the percentages of whites has gone down relative to other races because the immigration laws have been violated.

Also, when Buchanan says “I like that country,” some infer that he is really saying “I like that white country, and I don’t like a country that is less white.” He may have also meant that he simply liked the country in which he grew up. Whether he liked it for its whiteness or its high regard for enforcement of immigration law remains unclear (at least from the isolated quote you took).

I think it’s possible that Buchanan could have racial issues, but until we get into his mind (or more thoroughly read his literature, or examine his spoken words in greater context) it is difficult to make that determination. I am always suspicious of people who ascribe motivation to others without sufficient evidence to back that claim; after all, it’s far easier to identify and critique a persons stated views rather than their thoughts.

Again, the real issue is illegal vs. legal immigration, not the racial homogeneity of the nation. The debate is about the enforcement of immigration laws (whether it should be done or not), and this is a problem — there should be no debate over whether the law is enforced. It should always be enforced. If you favor increased immigration, then you should join in the debate to relax existing legal restrictions on immigration; that would be legitimate. Instead, you have attacked the messenger at just the same time he has released a book about this very subject; it seems you are out to discredit the message of enforcing the law by discrediting the messenger.

John Dias
Founder, DontMakeHerMad.com

Does White Euro-centric America benefit from the influences of African, Hispanic, or Asian culture…? Absolutely. Nothing like some mix to add some spice and make the whole more vibrant. But do I want to live in an African, Hispanic or Asian culture…? No way.

It seems the only group not allowed to stick up for its own racial or cultural identity are white males. We need an army of people like Pat Buchanan.

Reyes, you’re an intolerant racist.

Does White Euro-centric America benefit from the influences of African, Hispanic, or Asian culture…? Absolutely. Nothing like some mix to add some spice and make the whole more vibrant. But do I want to live in an African, Hispanic or Asian culture…? No way.

It seems the only group not allowed to stick up for its own racial or cultural identity are white males. We need an army of people like Pat Buchanan.

Reyes, you’re an intolerant racist.

Does White Euro-centric America benefit from the influences of African, Hispanic, or Asian culture…? Absolutely. Nothing like some mix to add some spice and make the whole more vibrant. But do I want to live in an African, Hispanic or Asian culture…? No way.

It seems the only group not allowed to stick up for its own racial or cultural identity are white males. We need an army of people like Pat Buchanan.

Reyes, you’re an intolerant racist.

Dear Robert,
Is the term “Gringo” one of love and respect?
This country is now being invaded and subverted, not immigrated to, by people who enter illegally, flaunt the Mexican flag, burn the American flag, wave anti-American placards, smuggle in Spanish as a second language, then have the audacity to demand financial assistance for education and housing, get a driver’s license and even vote even though they don’t know the language.
Due to Hispanic-American history, it is as difficult for an Hispanic immigrant to take the oath of allegiance to this country whole-heartedly as it is a Muslim.
Get real, Mr. Reyes.

Dear Robert,
Is the term “Gringo” one of love and respect?
This country is now being invaded and subverted, not immigrated to, by people who enter illegally, flaunt the Mexican flag, burn the American flag, wave anti-American placards, smuggle in Spanish as a second language, then have the audacity to demand financial assistance for education and housing, get a driver’s license and even vote even though they don’t know the language.
Due to Hispanic-American history, it is as difficult for an Hispanic immigrant to take the oath of allegiance to this country whole-heartedly as it is a Muslim.
Get real, Mr. Reyes.

Dear Robert,
Is the term “Gringo” one of love and respect?
This country is now being invaded and subverted, not immigrated to, by people who enter illegally, flaunt the Mexican flag, burn the American flag, wave anti-American placards, smuggle in Spanish as a second language, then have the audacity to demand financial assistance for education and housing, get a driver’s license and even vote even though they don’t know the language.
Due to Hispanic-American history, it is as difficult for an Hispanic immigrant to take the oath of allegiance to this country whole-heartedly as it is a Muslim.
Get real, Mr. Reyes.

PS And, sorry to say, Mr Reyes, you are an intolerant racist.

PS And, sorry to say, Mr Reyes, you are an intolerant racist.

PS And, sorry to say, Mr Reyes, you are an intolerant racist.