Pat Buchanan Slams ’94 Contract With America As “Overrated,” “Silly”

video

by Frances Martel | 4:57 pm, April 17th, 2010

» 7 comments

With a Democratic president’s approval ratings on decline and a loud right-wing opposition, many pundits are harking back to the Clinton days when then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich signed a Contract with America that got Republicans a 60-seat gain in Congress. Pat Buchanan joins them, but only to bash the Contract as “one of the most overrated things in politics.”

Asked if he believed the key to Republican success in November was a comprehensive political platform on which all candidates could run, Buchanan vehemently disagreed. When the 1994 “Republican revolution” happened, he argued, “people weren’t out there cheering for the Contract with America… the idea of putting out some great big program is silly.” Having a solid platform with a party that has a very flexible spectrum of ideas is to divide the party, he concluded– “it leaves you to attack. The best thing the outparty has is its mobility. It is on the attack constantly.” Instead, he suggested Republicans rally around the things which the agree unanimous on, many of which aren’t necessarily policy ideas:

“the Republicans ought to get off this idea of putting together programs or ideas that divide our coalition right now. What are we all united on? We don’t like health care, we don’t agree with Obama and the administration, we don’t like all those liberals, we don’t like Pelosi and Reid. You’ve got your tickets right there! Go after them. Wait for 2011 for individual candidates like [Mitt] Romney, and Ron Paul and [Sarah] Palin to put out their ideas”

Note a certain 2012 presidential hopeful that may or may not have written the Contract with America is notably absent from Buchanan’s GOP presidential short-list.

Watch the clip below:

1994, Contract with America, msnbc, newt gingrich, Pat Buchanan, Republicans

valkyrie101

In other words, Buchanan argues that Republicans not define themselves except with regard to a few core principles,because if the party is more firm than that, it will be held accountable. And better to be mysterious, and unaccountable, lest we hurt the feelings of some of our associated groups who have strong feelings we can not defend.
felixw

MSNBC puts on Pat Buchanan, because they look for the public figure least capable of articulating and defending conservative views. If MSNBC were serious about political dialogue and debate, they wouldn’t feature some septuagenarian from the Nixon era. They hire Buchanan precisely because they hope he will say something outrageous. So don’t expect the rest of us to act shocked and surprised when he does exactly what they are paying him for.
Caryson

Felix, I concur!

Pat Buchanan has a constituency of …….well of just Pat Buchanan.

He does not represent modern conservatism and the lefties at MSNBC trot him out as their token “go to” righty.

His thoughts are about as important and relevant as Bill Maher on the left.
valkyrie101

No, Pat is great. Good spokesperson for the right view points. He loves politically incorrect, and I like that.
felixw

The fact that Valkyrie approves of Pat Buchanan simply proves my point.
pyrope

Pukehanan is getting senile methinks. Gingrich has a good mind still but he’s not “the President.” I think the conservatives deserve better than both.
vingmoo

Now there is a dude that is just too full of himself!

Lou
http://www.anon-vpn.cz.tc