Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

babylonsister

(170,963 posts)
Fri Feb 17, 2012, 09:12 AM Feb 2012

Pat Buchanan (whines about those damn libruls): The New Blacklist



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/02/17/the_new_blacklist_113170.html

The New Blacklist
By Pat Buchanan


My days as a political analyst at MSNBC have come to an end.

After 10 enjoyable years, I am departing, after an incessant clamor from the left that to permit me continued access to the microphones of MSNBC would be an outrage against decency, and dangerous.

snip//

If my book is racist and anti-Semitic, how did Sean Hannity, Erin Burnett, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Megyn Kelly, Lou Dobbs and Ralph Nader miss that? How did Charles Payne, African-American host on Fox radio, who has interviewed me three times, fail to detect its racism?

How did Michael Medved miss its anti-Semitism?




snip//

Without a hearing, they smear and stigmatize as racist, homophobic or anti-Semitic any who contradict what George Orwell once called their "smelly little orthodoxies." They then demand that the heretic recant, grovel, apologize, and pledge to go forth and sin no more.

Defy them, and they will go after the network where you work, the newspapers that carry your column, the conventions that invite you to speak. If all else fails, they go after the advertisers.

I know these blacklisters. They operate behind closed doors, with phone calls, mailed threats and off-the-record meetings. They work in the dark because, as Al Smith said, nothing un-American can live in the sunlight.
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

HillWilliam

(3,310 posts)
3. Yeah, his cronies and enablers "see nothing wrong"
Fri Feb 17, 2012, 09:56 AM
Feb 2012

His list of supporters is a veritable who's who of people who would gladly trespass into your back yard, steal the sheets off your line and the wood off the side of your shed. Then they'll sneak off somewhere else to bully someone they don't know, burn a cross in their yard and beat them with a Bible they don't read.

Feh, and a pox on all their houses.

 

DCKit

(18,541 posts)
4. "They operate behind closed doors, with phone calls, mailed threats and off-the-record meetings."
Fri Feb 17, 2012, 10:43 AM
Feb 2012

We learned that from YOU Pat, except when WE do it, it really is "grassroots."

SoCalDem

(103,856 posts)
6. STFU, Uncle Pat
Fri Feb 17, 2012, 11:02 AM
Feb 2012

You had a good-long ride..a well-paid ride, during which you routinely spouted your xenophobic/racist/homophobic nonsense.

You were "fired" about 10 years too late.

Hope you saved your money, Dude

 

flexnor

(392 posts)
13. Buchanan: A vote for Obama in 2012 is a vote against a needless war with Iran
Fri Feb 17, 2012, 12:38 PM
Feb 2012

yup, nothing more racist, than saying that. who's voice on the iran issue carries more weight in red states? yours, or his? this move could be characterized as 'win the battle, but enter the needless war'


Year 2012 is thus shaping up as a war-or-peace election, with Republicans the war party and Democrats the peace-and-diplomacy party."


"Why have the Iranians not followed through on their threat to close the Strait of Hormuz and begun to dial it back?

War with the United States would be a disaster. Though the Tehran regime might survive -- as Saddam Hussein's survived Desert Storm -- Iran's navy, most of its armor, anti-aircraft and anti-ship defenses, and its strategic missile force would be destroyed, as would much of the country's infrastructure. Iran would be set back years.

Who, then, wants war with Iran?

All those who would like to see exactly that happen to Iran.

And who are they? The Netanyahu government and its echo chamber in U.S. politics and media, the neoconservatives, members of Congress, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. (my note MSNBC = MS-NBC, ever thought about who owns NBC? -> GE, a military industrial complex titan)

And as the Obama administration is the major force in U.S. politics opposed to war with Iran, its defeat in November would increase, to near certitude, the probability of a U.S. war with Iran in 2013.
Yet if the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence community are correct -- Iran does not have a bomb and has not decided to build a bomb -- why should we go to war with Iran?

Answer: Iran represents "an existential threat" to Israel.

But Israel has 200 atomic bombs and three ways to deliver them, while Iran has never built, tested or weaponized a nuclear device. Who is the existential threat to whom here?

And though a U.S. war on Iran would be calamitous for Iran, it would be no cakewalk for Americans, who could become terrorist targets for years in the Gulf, Afghanistan, Baghdad's Green Zone, Lebanon and even here in the USA.

Year 2012 is thus shaping up as a war-or-peace election, with Republicans the war party and Democrats the peace-and-diplomacy party."

http://townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2012/02/07/who_wants_war_with_iran/page/full/

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Pat Buchanan (whines abou...