Buchanan, you are unqualified for anything. You've been pushed along all your life to where you are now; nothing you have accomplished so far can be attributed to your own intellect. W@nker.
he was given this platform to scream his craziness because he represents a lot of other silly racist nuts and it's good that they see how dumb, unfair, and uneducated they look. I've just been laughing my butt off. he's hilarious and what's decent mind would take him seriously?
mplay, i'll bet you there are millions of americans who would nod their crazy heads in agreement with everything he said.
I do think he intentionally took advantage of rachel's civility, and she goofed by letting him speak for so ling, uninterupted and not challenging directly the crazy shit he was saying.
RM is an otherwise together person, but should stick a fork in this relationship and call it done. Her affection for this hater is frankly, bizarre.
Rachel likes Pat b/c their debates over the years have allowed each of them to showcase their ideas w/o resorting to personal attacks. I like how civil they both always are with eachother. Arguably, Rachel got her sweet job for MSNBC by honing her arguments against Pat in their verbal jousts and making a name for herself. Logic is enhanced when we engage the fringe.
She should have engaged his arguments more this time though.
uh, no, this: "Arguably, Rachel got her sweet job for MSNBC by honing her arguments against Pat in their verbal jousts and making a name for herself." That is crap.
Buchanan is a straight up racist, and Rachel shouldn't even entertain his lunacy. She degrades herself by doing so instead of showing off how civil she can be to a hater.
However, there is no way she "honed" her debating skills on Pat, because she didn't even do a good job here. To say she owes her success to him is idiocy.
I conceded that "She should have engaged his arguments more this time though." In the past, she's showed the errors of his logic really well. I say that her experience debating him may have contributed to her job b/c repeatedly fortified her arguments by bouncing them off of his thick skull over the yrs.
Pat is backwards, but by letting him air out notions from the '50's, she allows for every idea, even the bad/ crazy ones, to compete in the marketplace of ideas. That's essential for democracy.
Again, no. To narrow Rachel's success down to "arguably" honing her skills on Pat remains absurd.
As far as letting lunatics have air time, there's an entire network called Fox News especially for them. Rush Limbaugh spews his racist and misogynistic filth to huge success on the radio. They don't need anymore space to be hateful. People know where to find these creeps if they want to.
Rachel can refute anything any of them have to say without giving them face time on prime time.
Sure, Conservatives have thr media outlets, but it's healthy when channels don't seem 100% liberal or righty, as Jon Stewart has criticized MSNBC and FOX, by instead engaging the spectrum.
Since Pat wasn't even selling a book, his "face time" that you resent only served to his detriment, exposing old ideas that fail to resonate, and indeed offend, today(see Autotune "pat buchanan fail").
Pat's ethnocentric, archaic ideas are yet another reason to vote Democrat, esp. among young people.
Can you show me how Buchanan has suffered detrimental consequences in any way for expressing his racism and misogyny? A feature in a YT video doesn't quite add up to having his contract with MSNBC canceled, which hasn't happened. He didn't even apologize, and life goes on for him. Didn't skip a beat.
I don't think anyone who agrees/disagrees with Buchanan has changed their mind about being a Democrat or Republican due to this. The Democratic party is no panacea for what ails this country.
Pat's 'tangible' backlash is lmtd. But in my Afro-Amer Political Thought class I compared his tirade to Taney's Dred Scott ruling- "it is too clear for dispute that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration." Both Pat and Taney base minorities' legitimacy today on their presence at the nation's framing/ founding, to the dismay of my 70% Black class. Blacks vote Dem 90%, but Pat fortifies their resolve.
Bull. Buchanan doesn't change anyone's mind one way or the other, or strengthen anyone's resolve who is already voting 90% support. He's a kooky outlier everyone can point to to support their position, pro or con. The one thing about this bigot is he certainly is consistent.
Which is why he shouldn't be given anymore face time on TV. We KNOW what he's gonna say. Same old shit that doesn't need or deserve a media outlet.
i think she was naive to have given him this platform and opportunity. he took it and RAN.
white men were 100% of the men who wrote the constitution, blah, blah blah. yeah, and white men owned 100% of the black people in this country. and 100% of women and blacks couldn't vote at the founding of this country. that's his rationale??
He's been on the show before and while he's always spouting crazy, it never seemed this bad before.
If she'd seen his commentary on the other shows, though -- and I'm sure she did, she should have realized that there was no use trying to have a logical conversation about this with him.
While I understand I'm in no place to ask for it, I'd really like her to share her rationale for engaging him. It upset a lot of people, myself included and I don't see a whole lot of good coming from it.
i think i read on willatwork's twitter that she was going to address his points one by one, but with the emergence of the walter cronkite story, that was canceled. Monday, maybe? I'm sure she wants to address his lunacy in and of itself, and will hopefully explain why she even gave him face time on national TV in the first place. (fingers crossed.)
I need to learn how to control my temper like Maddow is here, especially when debating someone like Buchanan, who is essentially taking up more than his fair share of time.
100% crap. NO ONE gets into princeton or any college because of their race its all about abilities, suma cum laude is awarded to people with high GPAs. Its very shamefull that pat bucana would trivialise this woman's outstanding academic achievements like that. As a student who has had to work hard in college I am deeply offended by that statement.
Is that Pat from from the old SNL skit, is that a girl or a guy? Gross!
Amen4the2nd 4 months ago
Buchanan, you are unqualified for anything. You've been pushed along all your life to where you are now; nothing you have accomplished so far can be attributed to your own intellect. W@nker.
ThamesOrIsis 1 year ago
Well hell yeah Pat he's proud of white just like tupac is proud of blacks, this interviewer is biased and thinks she has him beat.
Alterofsacrafice 1 year ago
Who is the man interviewing Pat Buchannan?
asktoms 2 years ago
fuck you, buchannan
baronmorris 2 years ago
PLEASE, RACHEL,
STOP GIVING THIS ANNOYING FUCK BUCHANNAN A PUBLIC PLATFORM!
and to Pat Buchannan, pls hurry up and have that long overdue coronary implosion in your every shrinking heart.
VIVA OBAMA!
baronmorris 2 years ago
he was given this platform to scream his craziness because he represents a lot of other silly racist nuts and it's good that they see how dumb, unfair, and uneducated they look. I've just been laughing my butt off. he's hilarious and what's decent mind would take him seriously?
Mplay1983 2 years ago 3
mplay, i'll bet you there are millions of americans who would nod their crazy heads in agreement with everything he said.
I do think he intentionally took advantage of rachel's civility, and she goofed by letting him speak for so ling, uninterupted and not challenging directly the crazy shit he was saying.
RM is an otherwise together person, but should stick a fork in this relationship and call it done. Her affection for this hater is frankly, bizarre.
mad4maddow 2 years ago 2
Rachel likes Pat b/c their debates over the years have allowed each of them to showcase their ideas w/o resorting to personal attacks. I like how civil they both always are with eachother. Arguably, Rachel got her sweet job for MSNBC by honing her arguments against Pat in their verbal jousts and making a name for herself. Logic is enhanced when we engage the fringe.
She should have engaged his arguments more this time though.
DamnAllSequels 2 years ago
uh, no, this: "Arguably, Rachel got her sweet job for MSNBC by honing her arguments against Pat in their verbal jousts and making a name for herself." That is crap.
Buchanan is a straight up racist, and Rachel shouldn't even entertain his lunacy. She degrades herself by doing so instead of showing off how civil she can be to a hater.
However, there is no way she "honed" her debating skills on Pat, because she didn't even do a good job here. To say she owes her success to him is idiocy.
mad4maddow 2 years ago
I conceded that "She should have engaged his arguments more this time though." In the past, she's showed the errors of his logic really well. I say that her experience debating him may have contributed to her job b/c repeatedly fortified her arguments by bouncing them off of his thick skull over the yrs.
Pat is backwards, but by letting him air out notions from the '50's, she allows for every idea, even the bad/ crazy ones, to compete in the marketplace of ideas. That's essential for democracy.
DamnAllSequels 2 years ago
Again, no. To narrow Rachel's success down to "arguably" honing her skills on Pat remains absurd.
As far as letting lunatics have air time, there's an entire network called Fox News especially for them. Rush Limbaugh spews his racist and misogynistic filth to huge success on the radio. They don't need anymore space to be hateful. People know where to find these creeps if they want to.
Rachel can refute anything any of them have to say without giving them face time on prime time.
mad4maddow 2 years ago
Sure, Conservatives have thr media outlets, but it's healthy when channels don't seem 100% liberal or righty, as Jon Stewart has criticized MSNBC and FOX, by instead engaging the spectrum.
Since Pat wasn't even selling a book, his "face time" that you resent only served to his detriment, exposing old ideas that fail to resonate, and indeed offend, today(see Autotune "pat buchanan fail").
Pat's ethnocentric, archaic ideas are yet another reason to vote Democrat, esp. among young people.
DamnAllSequels 2 years ago
Can you show me how Buchanan has suffered detrimental consequences in any way for expressing his racism and misogyny? A feature in a YT video doesn't quite add up to having his contract with MSNBC canceled, which hasn't happened. He didn't even apologize, and life goes on for him. Didn't skip a beat.
I don't think anyone who agrees/disagrees with Buchanan has changed their mind about being a Democrat or Republican due to this. The Democratic party is no panacea for what ails this country.
mad4maddow 2 years ago
Pat's 'tangible' backlash is lmtd. But in my Afro-Amer Political Thought class I compared his tirade to Taney's Dred Scott ruling- "it is too clear for dispute that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration." Both Pat and Taney base minorities' legitimacy today on their presence at the nation's framing/ founding, to the dismay of my 70% Black class. Blacks vote Dem 90%, but Pat fortifies their resolve.
DamnAllSequels 2 years ago
Bull. Buchanan doesn't change anyone's mind one way or the other, or strengthen anyone's resolve who is already voting 90% support. He's a kooky outlier everyone can point to to support their position, pro or con. The one thing about this bigot is he certainly is consistent.
Which is why he shouldn't be given anymore face time on TV. We KNOW what he's gonna say. Same old shit that doesn't need or deserve a media outlet.
mad4maddow 2 years ago
Shouldn't he wait and see how she does in her new job for a while, before criticising her outright?
ZKY2 2 years ago
i think she was naive to have given him this platform and opportunity. he took it and RAN.
white men were 100% of the men who wrote the constitution, blah, blah blah. yeah, and white men owned 100% of the black people in this country. and 100% of women and blacks couldn't vote at the founding of this country. that's his rationale??
mad4maddow 2 years ago 2
He's been on the show before and while he's always spouting crazy, it never seemed this bad before.
If she'd seen his commentary on the other shows, though -- and I'm sure she did, she should have realized that there was no use trying to have a logical conversation about this with him.
While I understand I'm in no place to ask for it, I'd really like her to share her rationale for engaging him. It upset a lot of people, myself included and I don't see a whole lot of good coming from it.
Meggion 2 years ago
i think i read on willatwork's twitter that she was going to address his points one by one, but with the emergence of the walter cronkite story, that was canceled. Monday, maybe? I'm sure she wants to address his lunacy in and of itself, and will hopefully explain why she even gave him face time on national TV in the first place. (fingers crossed.)
mad4maddow 2 years ago
Yeah... I actually do think affirmative action is outdated.. but... it is impossible to support that crap...
tavadon777 2 years ago
@mad4maddow white people have sacrificed everything for this country.
sublimeade 1 year ago
I need to learn how to control my temper like Maddow is here, especially when debating someone like Buchanan, who is essentially taking up more than his fair share of time.
Freshmanwave 2 years ago 2
100% crap. NO ONE gets into princeton or any college because of their race its all about abilities, suma cum laude is awarded to people with high GPAs. Its very shamefull that pat bucana would trivialise this woman's outstanding academic achievements like that. As a student who has had to work hard in college I am deeply offended by that statement.
3star2nr 2 years ago 3