No, the words are almost identical. If one were to to examine the right-wing websites, I am sure that this is the strategy to get the spin out.
I am not sure how the Bush campaign is going to spin this. I don’t think there is a good way out.
If the Bush campaign hired me as an advisor, I’d recommend until election day using an anti-Kerry attack strategy. They need to convince people in the center of the political spectrum Kerry is the worse alternative.
This is Pat Buchanan’s mag. Are you saying Pat represents the “political mainstream”?
No, I meant the simple combination that Bush can’t get support from the liberals nor the conservatives. E.g., Bush is so far out, Michael Moore and Pat Buchanan agree he’s crazy.
Of course. He get’s his support from the centrist majority.
I think this is significant. My opinion is whether or not Bush wins or loses, there is going to be a battle within the Republican party between the neocons and true conservatives for control of the party. True conservatives may hold their noses and vote for Bush, but come November 3 they’re going to want to start to take the party back. I wish them the best of luck.
<Obligatory Bitterness>
That was almost my magazine! I was one of two finalists for the General Manager’s job there a few years ago. Had a great poolside interview with McConnell.
</OG>
As for how the administration reacts I’d say they won’t. Ignore it as there’s no profit in attacking (and calling attention to) the paleo-cons over there. Only if this gets play in the media and they start asking the President about it will they even notice it.
As for what AmCon did I’d say it’s a fine piece of magazine work. Here are the candidates: here’s what we think of each of them. It makes the case for each while avoiding any set endorsement. Courageous piece of publishing and I admire it.
An interesting and very clear article .
What the author forgets to mention is that tehre is no way the situation in Iraq can evern improve if the US can’t dragg the UN in (and I mean: full engagement on all levels). There is no way I see that happen when Bush gets a second term.
I don’t think that people in the US have a realistic view on how this Bush-debacle administration is viewed in the rest of the world.
Getting rid of it shall be looked at as a first step in going back to business as usual.
As things are, the least you can say is that Kerry has the benefit of the doubt. Bush has nothing but staggering disgust and disdain.
Salaam. A
I dunno. Remember that Pat actually RAN against Bush last time, and he’s endorsed him this time around. Yes, Bush has angered certain types of conservatives, but I’d be very hesitant to call Buchanan’s group the “true” conservatives. They tend to be xenophobic populists more than anything else.
The same majority that got him elected? Oh, wait, that wasn’t a majority! :smack:
All you need these days is a majority on the Supreme Court. 
I’m only familiar wit PB by reputation, but I’ve heard this a plenty. I suspect that PB et al are at least not ‘big-government conservatives’ like those of Team Bush. AFAICT, the only difference between ‘big-government conservatives’ and liberals is the source of the funding- bgcs want to borrow the money and liberals want to raise taxes.
While PB et al may not be the true scotsmen, they seem less liberal than some other people who walk under the conservative banner.
PB has changed quite a bit over the years. He’s a very smart, well educated guy, so don’t underestimate him in that dept. But he is a religious conservative, wanting to legislate morality. He’s anti free trade, and disturbingly close to a Christian/White Nationalist in a lot of his positions. Yeah, he’s a small government guy, but that’s about all he’s got going for him if you ask me.