So just couple of days ago Amato blogged about MSNBC analyst Pat Buchanan’s recent xenophobic tirade over Team USA’s disheartening soccer loss against Mexico. Well Buchanan’s appalling views are in the news again. Heather then eviscerated Buchanan for defending tax cuts for private jets and pretending poor people do not pay any taxes. Now the MSNBC analyst (I will keep harping on this phrase, which I will expand a little while later in the post) has now fired off an absurd shot against the supporters of same-sex marriage by writing a column in support of … prejudice.
Here is a graf from Buchanan’s latest hateful rambling [Warning: Link goes to WND] :
What is the moral basis of the argument that homosexuality is normal, natural and healthy? In recent years, it has been associated with high levels of AIDS and enteric diseases, and from obits in gay newspapers, early death. Where is the successful society where homosexual marriage was normal?
Well I guess we can give this guy a little credit for honesty I suppose. He doesn’t hide his bigotry and his latest hateful rambling serves the purpose of reminding everyone the deep strain of conservative prejudice.
The question though is why does someone who is so overtly championing bigotry, continue to get a platform at network like MSNBC. What does he bring to the table? I guess MSNBC employs someone like him because he fits the progressive caricature of conservatives. May be his comments generate some buzz, ratings, and heck blogposts like this one. I am sure MSNBC loves segments like the so called “epic battle” between Buchanan and Maddow. Yet, does that justify a network looking the other way, while boosting the profile of someone who is so transparently hateful.
I don’t need to go into too much details on Buchanan’s ugly past. Just in recent months he mocked President Barack Obama as “affirmative action all the way” after a birther dust up. Jamison Foser made the case almost a year ago for Buchannan’s departure from MSNBC:
Despite a decades-long track record of offensive comments about … well, nearly everybody, Buchanan continues to write columns and appear as a commentator on MSNBC.
During his time in public life, Buchanan has defended Adolf Hitler -- repeatedly. He has peddled Holocaust denial claims and compared suspected Nazi war criminal John Demjanjuk to Jesus Christ.
Buchanan has reminisced fondly about his childhood in segregated Washington, DC, and complained that “Old heroes like ... Robert E. Lee are replaced by Dr. King." He wrote that “integration of blacks and whites” was likely to result in “perpetual friction, as the incapable are placed … side by side with the capable.” Buchanan's anti-integration views were so hard-core, even Richard Nixon characterized Buchanan’s them as “segregation forever.” When 67 blacks were shot to death by South African police, Buchanan dismissed the massacre as “a few South African whites mistreating a couple of blacks.” In 1989, Buchanan defended Bob Jones University’s ban on interracial dating. 1989!
You should read Foser’s entire post if you want to get a refresher on this guy’s past.
Yet, Buchanan continues to be employed by MSNBC. MSNBC just did a huge song and dance about suspending Mark Halperin (although as Kos noted there are bigger issues than what Halperin said about the President). The question every progressives should be wondering how can MSNBC justify keeping such an overt bigot on its payroll, who continues to preach so much hatred.
Progressives should ask hosts such as Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O’Donnell whether they feel good about associating themselves with an employer, who continue to look the other way while Buchanan fires off his bigoted ramblings. Just because Buchanan may generate some ratings (and I have not seen any data on that) that doesn’t justify MSNBC’s promotion of individuals who continue to spread so much bigotry and hate.
I hope progressive organizations consider putting same pressure on MSNBC, the same way they did on CNN for allowing Lou Dobbs a prominent platform to spread his message of hate. Oh and it will certainly be interesting if Keith Olbermann has anything to say about this.