Pat Buchanan out at MSNBC

The network has finally made it official after he expressed lament in his recent book about the shrinking white population in the United States, essentially writing that he worries that the nation cannot survive if it becomes too integrated because citizens will lose the commonality that binds a people together. Even Sean Hannity, as this article linked explains, finds that to be too much (Disclaimer: I know little about Hannity's views on race - I'm merely working under the assumption that, all things being equal, he would be likely to support a conservative commentator).


http://www.mediaite.com/tv/sean-hannity-takes-pat-buchanan-to-task-over-controversial-remarks-about-the-end-of-white-america/

 

A couple things I find odd about this:

- Is the Pat Buchanan that wrote this book any different than the Pat Buchanan who has been on MSNBC for over 10 years? Did they not know is views?

- MSNBC relentlessly shilled Mika's book, and Tom Brokaw's book, and Chris Mathews Book, etc., etc. etc. It was unbearable. But this one book, because it's controversial, instead of happy talk, cannot be discussed?

- They've had him off the air for months, but didn't have the courage to make it official until now. They worked together for over a decade. Even if they found this book offensive, they could have handled this better.

 

Morning Joe and Mika disagree with decision:

JOE, MIKA "strongly disagree" with Pat Buchanan's involuntary, albeit amicable, departure from MSNBC -- "Statement by Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski regarding Pat Buchanan," from Joe's blog on POLITICO.com : "Everyone at 'Morning Joe' considers Pat Buchanan to be a friend and a member of the family. Even though we strongly disagree with the contents of Pat's latest book, Mika and I believe those differences should have been debated in public. An open dialogue with 'Morning Joe' regulars like Al Sharpton and Harold Ford, Jr. could have developed into an important debate on the future of race relations in America. Because we believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant, Mika and I strongly disagree with this outcome. We understand that the parting was amicable. Still, we will miss Pat."

Good for them for not holding company line.

 

Good riddance. But yes, this should have happened long ago.

 

Agreed - MSNBC should only provide one narrow perspective. It gets to confusing otherwise.

 

That must be why a certain segment of the country clearly understands Fox News Network. ;D

 

Right. There would be no problem at all if Buchanan was just a straight conservative, but his white supremacist, anti-Semitic views have been generally known for ages.

 

But yet MSNBC is happy to provide Rev Al a forum.

 

Having Buchanan (and Scarborough, who they should also shitcan) on MSNBC is indicative of a few things:

1) Like all other mass-media outlets, they're run by a multibillion-dollar corporation which ultimately calls the shots

2) MSNBC likes to adopt the Kumbayah-liberal self-flagellation pose -- it would be unbecoming or unfair to spew uninterrupted liberal propaganda so we must select a few screeching righties to prove we're "fair and balanced." MSNBC having Scarborough as the namesake of its morning flagship show would be like Faux Fascist Noise hired Alan Grayson to star on its morning show.

3) I've only watched Sharpton briefly but he has been strangely muted on his talk show. Rarely if ever says anything that would really upset anybody, except of course the wingnuts who are just congenitally hacked off those uppity ni .... uhhhh, ne'er-do-wells, are even allowed to speak in public without being spoken to.

4) Buchanan, remember, is a NAZI SYMPATHIZER. Heil Hitler and all that. End of story.

 

Uh, read up on "Tawana Brawley" and then get back to me.

Those two words alone should have gotten Rev. Al permanently Borked from any position carrying more responsibility or prestige than the guy who selects the flavor of Jell-O to be served in the cafeteria.

 

I don't see how anyone can oppose this. Maybe the reason sucks, but Buchanan is an awful person.

 

No surprise, given his palship with his boy Nixon, but his less-guarded writings are laced with anti-Semitism. Incorporating such feelings into one's personal philosophy is reprehensible and indefensible. And, no, I'm not Jewish.