275,000 People Demand Pat Buchanan Be Fired From MSNBC

[White Eagle]

Ya know, I don't make my threads ON TOPIC because I like the way Jubbers can take it other places. But this is totally derailed. Mods please tell Chance1 to get back to topic.

 

[chance1]

Ya know, I don't make my threads ON TOPIC because I like the way Jubbers can take it other places. But this is totally derailed. Mods please tell Chance1 to get back to topic.

hardly totally derailed

just cause you and chrisrobin and rareboy say so

doesn't make it so

MSNBC - Pat's employer - MATTERS

MSNBC hires a lot of people - and their treatment of those employees and who gets hired, suspended, fired, etc.

is ....... germaine

love that word - germaine

am i spelling it right? is it in the right context?

Pat should not be fired

not for this

he is an asset to MSNBC - an asset that they are not utilizing enough IMO - he'd be great on Lawrence O'Donnell or Rachel - instead of those 2 only having head nodders on

imagine Rachel and Pat talking about an issue substantively - good stuff for the viewer

they should have him on MSNBC MORE not less

 

[White Eagle]

Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. I still go by it derailed.

 

[Centexfarmer]

Pat Buchanan's MIA From MSNBC While Promoting Controversial Book (UPDATED)

But one network on which Buchanan hasn't talked up the book is the one that actually employs him, MSNBC. Buchanan, a former Republican presidential speechwriter who later ran for the White House as a fiery populist candidate, hasn't appeared on MSNBC since Oct. 22, a few days after his book hit the shelves. The book, however, wasn't discussed

Funny that.

However, an MSNBC executive said that the network is taking the concerns seriously, while contending there had been a conscious decision -- predating any outside criticism -- not to have Buchanan on air promoting the book. The issue at hand, the executive said, was the views expressed in the book rather than any policy against promoting books written by on-air talent. Although Buchanan made one appearance since the book was published, it was not discussed on air

So apparently even MSNBC doesn't approve of the views expressed in Pat Buchanan's book.


Interesting that they seem to employ him for those some views.


Speaking of Al Sharpton, here's Pat Buchanan referring to President Obama as "your boy" back in August of this year:



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1pAUX22f2E[/ame]


I love Reverend Al's response.


From the article linked above:

The following month, Buchanan echoed comments by Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain about black voters being "brainwashed," when he told host Martin Bashir that they have "bought a lot of liberal propaganda on the liberal plantation, and I think he's right."

Herman Cain didn't say what's highlighted in red.


Those words came out of Pat Buchanan's mouth.


Who's racists?


This is the topic of this thread:

Rashad Robinson, ColorOfChange's executive director, who has blogged on The Huffington Post, said in a statement that "MSNBC's motto is 'lean forward,' but their silence in the face of Pat Buchanan's bigoted ideology is incredibly backwards."

 

[rareboy]

With all the well spoken and rational conservatives to have on MSNBC...I ask again...why would they pay this reprehensible man Buchanan a dollar to speak?

Maybe if all the cable news ekshtreme cage match shows with the crazies on the far left yelling at the crazies on the far right just stopped playing to the lowest common denominator.....

But I suspect that it is going to be some time before we see Pat on MSNBC.

 

[White Eagle]

Pat Buchanan's MIA From MSNBC While Promoting Controversial Book (UPDATED)


Funny that.



So apparently even MSNBC doesn't approve of the views expressed in Pat Buchanan's book.


Interesting that they seem to employ him for those some views.


Speaking of Al Sharpton, here's Pat Buchanan referring to President Obama as "your boy" back in August of this year:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1pAUX22f2E


I love Reverend Al's response.


From the article linked above:



Herman Cain didn't say what's highlighted in red.


Those words came out of Pat Buchanan's mouth.


Who's racists?


This is the topic of this thread:

Thank you for this. This proves without a doubt that Buchanan is a racist. Has always been a racist.

 

[chance1]

Pat Buchanan's MIA From MSNBC While Promoting Controversial Book (UPDATED)


Funny that.



So apparently even MSNBC doesn't approve of the views expressed in Pat Buchanan's book.


Interesting that they seem to employ him for those some views.


Speaking of Al Sharpton, here's Pat Buchanan referring to President Obama as "your boy" back in August of this year:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1pAUX22f2E


I love Reverend Al's response.


From the article linked above:



Herman Cain didn't say what's highlighted in red.


Those words came out of Pat Buchanan's mouth.


Who's racists?


This is the topic of this thread:

MSNBC is obviously hypocritical

Pat's convo with The Rev (oh is that racist???) is fine

"your boy" might be non PC but IMO racist for those who want desperately to find it

Love that MSNBC has 24/7 charlatan crook Al on but is pulling Pat

Love it as it exposes them for the 24/7 mouthpiece for moveon.org they are

same way as they continue to portray OWS folks as civil, intelligent, messaged, etc. - w/o showing the examples of violence +

Chris Matthews - Rachel Maddow - Lawrence O'Donnell - Ed Schultz + The Rev

quite a lineup of inclusion

dontcha think?

 

[Centexfarmer]

Number of signatures gathered by ColorOfChange.org telling MSNBC to fire Pat Buchanan:

275,000

Number of signatures gathered by every other .com, or .org telling MSNBC to fire Pat Buchanan:

0

(I just did a preliminary google/yahoo search with 0 results)

Number of posters in this thread who appear to believe that Al Sharpton is far worse than Pat Buchanan even on a good day:

1


Noted.

 

[White Eagle]

Al Sharpton is a better man than Buchanan will ever be. There is no place in this universe for the racist. Pat needs to just move on, as do others.

 

[NYCisME]

My point is their common "boss" MSNBC needs to have some consistency in evaluating whether one's words/actions support suspension/firing/etc.

And he did much more than "defend" her - he accused in a high profile manner a prosecutor who's life was ruined and actually sued brawley/sharpton after and won

he is anti white, anti Jew - and he never flinches from jumping on a situation to point out the racial angle - no matter what

The Don Imus situation

The

to reward this life long charlatan with a M-F show is a sorry thing for MSNBC to do

here's a recap of Sharpton's ACTIONS

Sharpton is nether anti-white nor anti-Jew and this biased "fact" list you linked to proves nothing. Is he without scandal? No. Does this make him a racist? No.

And sorry if what you perceive to be "the racial angle" is just reality to many of us who are of brown skin. Perhaps the "angles" he offers appear to just be rhetoric to you, but for millions of us this is reality.

Sorry if all of this disturbs your comfortable ignorance.

 

[Centexfarmer]

With all the well spoken and rational conservatives to have on MSNBC...I ask again...why would they pay this reprehensible man Buchanan a dollar to speak?

Maybe if all the cable news ekshtreme cage match shows with the crazies on the far left yelling at the crazies on the far right just stopped playing to the lowest common denominator.....

But I suspect that it is going to be some time before we see Pat on MSNBC.

I wouldn't be so sure.

The New York Times Best Sellers List, the most recent list available, has Pat Buchanan's new book and the center of the controversy listed at #25.

The cynic within me tells me that if MSNBC fires Pat Buchanan it will make news, and that chances are good that his book will climb up the Best Sellers list because people will start buying it to see what all of the fuss is about.

Win for Pat Buchanan, critiques from the right against MSNBC for doing so, more paid engagements for Pat Buchanan.

MSNBC sits quietly back, hoping things will blow over, limit Pat Buchanan's on air time and the next thing you know its the holidays full blown, and by the January 2012 primaries Pat Buchanan will be back in full view as if nothing happened.

Pat Buchanan's book begins to fall off the list, along with his speaking fees/engagements, and everyone can go back to be hated for whatever.

 

[chance1]

Sharpton is nether anti-white nor anti-Jew and this biased "fact" list you linked to proves nothing. Is he without scandal? No. Does this make him a racist? No.

And sorry if what you perceive to be "the racial angle" is just reality to many of us who are of brown skin. Perhaps the "angles" he offers appear to just be rhetoric to you, but for millions of us this is reality.

Sorry if all of this disturbs your comfortable ignorance.

nice

not sure what you mean by "racial angle"

for sure I'm not in your shoes but if I were in your shoes I would not support the likes of Sharpton who is divisive at best, criminal at worst

i think you're "reality" is that you're not very nice (see comfortable ignorance) and didn't read what Sharpton has done or feel that his race allows him to behave like this

His actions speak volumes

 

[Centexfarmer]

nice

not sure what you mean by "racial angle"

for sure I'm not in your shoes but if I were in your shoes I would not support the likes of Sharpton who is divisive at best, criminal at worst

i think you're "reality" is that you're not very nice (see comfortable ignorance) and didn't read what Sharpton has done or feel that his race allows him to behave like this

His actions speak volumes

Thought about removing that as a personal attack, not sure how I could have done that without making a scene.

Since you don't seem to be willing to let the subject of Al Sharpton, which you introduced into this discussion die, let me put it to you from a different angle.

You live in and grew up in New York City did you not?

I lived and worked in NYC in the Mid 80's, and even then I didn't know who Al Sharpton was/is.

Not until the Tawana Brawley story became National News in 1987.

Of course by then I was back here in Texas going to College.

That was my first introduction to "The Reverend Al Sharpton."

Since that time, I've always seen him as an opportunist; always trying to get his name, face, opinion out there. Not so much as an "activists" or "community organizer" but for Al Sharpton, or for whatever cause might get him the most attention.

My opinion of the man hasn't changed much over the years.

I can honestly say that I don't dislike him.

I'm suggesting that because you live in such close proximity to his day to day goings on in the NYC area, that you've developed a dislike for him dating back more than a couple of decades now.

Pat Buchanan is someone that this lover of American History has known dating back to Nixon.

The Man has influence, credentials, and credibility outside of the boroughs of the Big Apple.

His books, columns, and opinions influence public opinion (not upon himself), but on his out dated ideals of what America should be.

Even Al Sharpton himself recognized Pat Buchanan regarding his politics in the youtube clip that I posted above.

You despise Al Sharpton.

WE GOT IT!

Al Sharpton's actions speak volumes but Pat Buchanan has published volumes, he's worked as an advisor to Presidents, Conservative Think Tanks, and has ran for POTUS three times.

At the very least American History will remember him for those things, as opposed to a possible footnote in history for Al Sharpton.

What part of that is so difficult to understand?

This isn't comparing Apples to Apples, or even Apples to Oranges.

This is comparing a former New York, now "national celebrity" against a man that's had an influence on American Public/Political Policy dating back to when Richard M. Nixon was in office.

I'm having a difficult time trying to understand what's so difficult about grasping the differences here.

 

[Kulindahr]

They're both despicable. The only real difference is that Buchanan has a "grand old man" aura and doesn't run around looking for chances to jump in front of a TV camera.

But Sharpton is irrelevant to this thread. 275,000 signatures are what's relevant.

 

[Centexfarmer]

They're both despicable. The only real difference is that Buchanan has a "grand old man" aura and doesn't run around looking for chances to jump in front of a TV camera.

But Sharpton is irrelevant to this thread. 275,000 signatures are what's relevant.

Dang Kuli leave it to you to come into a thread and state the obvious.

 

[chance1]

Thought about removing that as a personal attack, not sure how I could have done that without making a scene.

Since you don't seem to be willing to let the subject of Al Sharpton, which you introduced into this discussion die, let me put it to you from a different angle.

You live in and grew up in New York City did you not?

I lived and worked in NYC in the Mid 80's, and even then I didn't know who Al Sharpton was/is.

Not until the Tawana Brawley story became National News in 1987.

Of course by then I was back here in Texas going to College.

That was my first introduction to "The Reverend Al Sharpton."

Since that time, I've always seen him as an opportunist; always trying to get his name, face, opinion out there. Not so much as an "activists" or "community organizer" but for Al Sharpton, or for whatever cause might get him the most attention.

My opinion of the man hasn't changed much over the years.

I can honestly say that I don't dislike him.

I'm suggesting that because you live in such close proximity to his day to day goings on in the NYC area, that you've developed a dislike for him dating back more than a couple of decades now.

Pat Buchanan is someone that this lover of American History has known dating back to Nixon.

The Man has influence, credentials, and credibility outside of the boroughs of the Big Apple.

His books, columns, and opinions influence public opinion (not upon himself), but on his out dated ideals of what America should be.

Even Al Sharpton himself recognized Pat Buchanan regarding his politics in the youtube clip that I posted above.

You despise Al Sharpton.

WE GOT IT!

Al Sharpton's actions speak volumes but Pat Buchanan has published volumes, he's worked as an advisor to Presidents, Conservative Think Tanks, and has ran for POTUS three times.

At the very least American History will remember him for those things, as opposed to a possible footnote in history for Al Sharpton.

What part of that is so difficult to understand?

This isn't comparing Apples to Apples, or even Apples to Oranges.

This is comparing a former New York, now "national celebrity" against a man that's had an influence on American Public/Political Policy dating back to when Richard M. Nixon was in office.

I'm having a difficult time trying to understand what's so difficult about grasping the differences here.

Personal attack? by me?

see my response to a personal attack - me being referenced as "ignorant"

I RESPONDED

Al Sharpton is important to this convo as it is CONTEXT

MSNBC

is back door-ing Pat B now - and promotes Rev. Al

MSNBC is beyond the pale

and transparently agenda driven

so I ask u

what part of that don't you get?

this is not a derail despite white eagle and rareboys "BOLD" posts

looks like the the resident JUBBERclubbers (see their screen names) are flexing and you're buying it a shame

I don't despise al sharpton

i can't believe he was given a M-F forum for his garbage
and if u watch him ......... he's not prepared to speak about real issues
not from a smarts standpoint and not from a professional standpoint

 

[Centexfarmer]

Personal attack? by me?

see my response to a personal attack - me being referenced as "ignorant"

I RESPONDED

Dignified and respectful.

Nothing wrong with your response.

Al Sharpton is important to this convo as it is CONTEXT

MSNBC

is back door-ing Pat B now - and promotes Rev. Al
MSNBC is beyond the pale

and transparently agenda driven

Why?

Where's the evidence of anything that you just posted that I quoted ^ there?

Where has MSNBC caved in anyway.

Last google that I searched, they're both still employed at MSNBC, and nothing has come of the 275,000 signatures from ColorOfChange.org.

An organization by the way who's mission statement is:

ColorOfChange.org exists to strengthen Black America's political voice. Our goal is to empower our members - Black Americans and our allies - to make government more responsive to the concerns of Black Americans and to bring about positive political and social change for everyone.

If you've read anywhere other than here where there are advocates for or against this petition outside of the known sources, then please share, because right now you appear to be punching at shadows.

Ghosts.

Straw Men.

so I ask u

what part of that don't you get?

this is not a derail despite white eagle and rareboys "BOLD" posts

looks like the the resident JUBBERclubbers (see their screen names) are flexing and you're buying it a shame

I'd strongly advise you not attempting to work that angle.

It didn't work up in Boston and it won't work here either.

I don't despise al sharpton

i can't believe he was given a M-F forum for his garbage
and if u watch him ......... he's not prepared to speak about real issues
not from a smarts standpoint and not from a professional standpoint

Great!

Right a letter to MSNBC and let them know how you feel about it.

I'm sure that it will have as much influence as the 275,000 who signed a petition against Pat Buchanan.

Jeezus on a fence post!

 

[chance1]

^ but did u like the video ???

 

[White Eagle]

Centex, it's apparent that Chance is not gonna let this go. I made a thread about Pat Buchanan and it becomes one about Al Sharpton. If I wanted a Sharpton thread, I would have made it.
Please, please close this thread.