Pat Buchanan Says Newt Gingrich Went Too Far With 'Ground Zero Mosque' Comments (VIDEO)

Everything that Buchanan is and stands for aside, his call on Gingrich is spot on. He is an opportunist to beat the band. And for Buchanan, with his history, calling Gingrich out, it's like Himmler telling Eichmann to not tell so many Jewish jokes at a party!

It's farging official. We're in Bizzaro World. When Pat Buchanan is the rational one on race . . .

When that old anti-semite Pat Buchanan says you've gone too far, you're certifiably in Bachmann-batshit-crazy land

What amazes me about buchannan is that over the years he is sounding more and more sane compared to the rest of the republicans. It's not that he is getting saner, it's just that republicans are getting crazier. Frightening thought.

Frightening indeed.

My brother is one of these brainless, reactionary idiots. Anyone else have an immediate family member who have drank deeply of the koolaid?

Let's not forget my personal favourite from the immigration "debates" of the Ninties, when people were floating boats across the Gulf of Mexico, hoping to be picked up by Coast Guard. Then, he declared that the United States was under no obligation to accept "Zulus and other undesirables."

Pat Buchanan is a lot of things -- mostly a nativist and an isolationist -- but two things he isn't are irrational and stupid. He wants his nativist, isolationist arguments to at least make sense, and Palin and Gingrich fail that test.

Gingrich is a Chicken Hawk. He is prepared to fight Muslim hoards all over the world. From his library that only includes his books.

"we live in a post-factual society"

Seemed Obama had the right idea during the election. Whatever the goofy topic was he knew he had to immediately call the liars out and state the truth. You don't let the media turn it into the 'outrage of the hour' for electoral purposes. The administration has been trying to manage the message, so to speak. Stop trying to be cute and stab the swift boaters in the eye. (metaphorically)

To my GOP 'friends': You know when you've gone too far?

When Pat Pat Buchanan is the voice of reason.

Read closer. Pat's upset because Gingrich slandered his beloved Nazis by comparing them to inferior mud people.

I am having a bit of difficulty understanding the political relevance of the supposed “Ground Zero Mosque.” For an issue to be politically relevant the issue should at the very least be an issue that is capable of redress by government action. If the government has no power to act on a matter, the issue is wholly irrelevant as a political issue and at that point only serves a rhetorical function.

Our national government is a limited government. Any act of government must be authorized by the U.S. Constitution. At the very least, there must be a legitimate government purpose for any governmental act. Those opposed have remained silent on what authority or power government has over where religious institutions may build. Additionally, those in opposition have yet to present or address what governmental purpose would be advanced by preventing or obstructing the construction of any Mosque regardless of whether the building were near or at any particular location of significance.

Similarly, the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution limits the states power by both forbidding unequal application of the law and incorporating First Amendment protections against burdening the Free Exercise of religion. Granted, free exercise may be burdened by laws of general applicability, but for a law to be generally applicable it must at the very least have a secular purpose. Even if opponents of the project were able to overcome the express non-secular purpose of the opposition, such a law targeting a particular religion or faith would be neither generally applicable or an equal application of the law.

It is clear that many people are opposed to the idea of Manhattan Muslims building a community center in their community and those persons are within their rights to approve or disapprove of that decision. However, opposition to the project is now being presented as grounds to support one political party over the other as if the government of the national or states has any power to prevent the project from moving forward.

If this is to be a “political issue” should those opposing the project not be required to explain or offer a “political solution?” Should we not be asking how this issue would be resolved differently by electing only politicians who oppose the project rather than those with no position or in favor of the project? Should we not ask how a candidates position on this matter is of any more significant consequence than that candidates position on which direct toilet paper should roll?

While Pat is right on this, I question his motivation in vocalizing his opposition to Vewts statement. I'm wondering if Pat sees his precious Palin's pathway to the presidency threatened by Newt.

"I am having a bit of difficulty understanding the political relevance of the supposed “Ground Zero Mosque.”

It isn't relevant to sane people. It's just the new gays, guns n' god outrage topic of the hour for the Atwater acolytes.

Islam sends the self-righteous-o-meter off the scale for some of the GOP base. You feed rabid attack dogs red meat. And it works. However, the strategy had almost played out it's usefulness. They needed a new enemy to scare the shit out of the US voters and the Muslims are apparently the current choice.

All Bat Puchanan aside, I just can't believe I voluntarily watched a 'Mourning Joe' clip.
Garlic and Holy Water, stat!

It makes one wounder about the intelligence of some of these Ditto Heads and TEABAGGERS when they take the word of a Drug Abusing Junkie as gospel

I seem to recall that when W was in office he went out of his way to disconnect 9/11 from Muslims and Islam. I rather admired that even though I suspected it had much more to do with his ties to the House of Saud than with anything like rational thinking.

Wouldn't it be nice if he and Condo Rice and Gen. Powell and the other three remaining sane Republicans took a stand against all of the GZM demagoguing?

Buchanan is disgusting, but he isn't phony. Gingrich is phony.

The thing is, Pat Buchanan has never had that much of a problem with Muslims. In fact, he has sort of taken their side over the years. This probably isn't because of any tolerant attitude; it is more likely a consequence of his deep and obsessive hatred of Jews. You know, the enemy of my enemy is my friend (I'm not necessarily saying all Muslims are enemies of all Jews, just that it's Pat's mindset).

Simple answers to simple questions:

Buchanan's a paleocon, Gingrich is a neocon. We may not like either one but they don't like each other either. Buchanan opposed the Iraq War, Gingrich, I presume, favored it although Gingrich kind of dropped out of the limelight in those years.

There is nothing the least bit surprising about this.

I assume this is an issue that engages so many people because it is a pseudo-moral issue -- anyone can have strong positive or negative feelings about whether they think it's 'right' to have a so-called 'mosque' built near so-called 'Ground Zero' without knowing anything at all about anything. It's simply a way of expressing how anti-Muslim you happen to be feeling, isn't it?

Buchanan says Naziism is irrelevant to this discussion. Well, he should know.

Pat's best article ever was when he wrote a piece in 2004 in some conservative mag (NR?) arguing FOR George W Bush to win reelection.

His reason: He wanted there to be no doubt in the history books what a colossal cluster invading Iraq while poorly invading Afghanistan was. He also mentioned that the blame for the impending financial crash should be pinned on Bush, too.

Wow, Pat. Good stuff. Saved John Kerry a lifetime of scapegoatery.

This is indeed a surprise. I'd never have thought that Newt Gingrich would cross the line from conservative to neofascist. But he's done it -- twice.

Not only has Gingrich called for the outright denial of Muslims' First Amendment constitutional right to freedom of worship by opposing the planned mosque and Islamic center on private, Muslim-owned property near Ground Zero, but he's also attacked Federal Judge Vaughn Walker's courageous decison declaring California's anti-gay Proposition 8 unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment and adamantly insisting that two people who love one another cannot marry solely because they are of the same gender.

He's also joined the racist anti-Latino crusade by nativists to alter or repeal the Fourteenth Amendment to deny U.S. citizenship to the American-born children of illegal immigrants.

That's very revealing of what kind of husband and father Newt Gingrich is that he would make such statements. I can only wonder what his ex-wives, Jackie Battley and Marianne Ginther (both of whom he divorced after having extramarital affairs) and his openly lesbian daughter, Candace Gingrich, think of him now.