Pat Buchanan: Dream-killer
Monday, November 17, 2008 at 9:30AM
Mike Paul, Republican strategist, tells Pat Buchanan, unapologetic bastard, that the Republicans need to be a "big tent party" and reach out to the young, women and minorities. Pat's all, "Um ... no." Then has a good laugh about it, doing his best to frustrate, confound and infuriate Paul, who (naturally) wishes there would be more than just him, Condi Rice, Michael Steele and Ron Christie at the holiday party. Pat is Pat and Paul takes offense. Insanity ensues and this time Chris Matthews didn't have to do any heavy lifting. I can't believe I forgot to post this last week!
Pat, who I "lovingly" call "The Bigot," is notorious for not putting up any happy-talk when it comes to doing anything different from what they did in the Nixon Administration to get some black votes. Pat's of the mind that if you can get your 12 to 20 percent, great. If you can't, who cares? Why is he going to waste time winning over people he either:
A) Believes cannot be won over
B) Doesn't want anyway
Pat all but told Paul, "Vote Republican! That's great! Convince your friends and family! Go do that! Me? Me? I'm doing what I've always done. Jack shit. Because I don't give a shit. No sir. I do not!"
What's "sad" is some ... er ... ill-informed conservatives have bashed Paul on the blogosphere for this above sparring with Buchanan, accusing him of supporting Barack Obama. I'm going to assume they based that on pigmentation only because between Paul, Ron Christie and Amy Holmes, I don't know who was tripping over their feet the hardest to explain why electing Barack Obama would be a nightmare. I almost wanted to comment and defend Paul, then I remembered how I couldn't stand him and stopped myself. "What am I doing!" I said as I started to type.
But, you know, I care. Even when I don't agree. I care ... about keeping the record straight. Besides, I don't want them putting Mike Paul and The Snob on the same team.
PS. I'm still on vacation! Complain all you want, but Mariah and Nick will still be there until next Monday (because I wrote all the items two weeks in advance)!
Reader Comments (34)
Love it!
"Why don't you examine YOURself!"
Straws. Pat is grasping for them.
Hun?
"The demographics work against the Republican party."
Snap, Pat. That's like what a politician (Parizeau) said here a few years ago when his party lost the separation referendum here in Quebec. It was "money and the ethnic vote."
Dude, you gotta think up something new.
"Demographics," "ethnics" or whatever the flavourful term of the day is, you need to TALK with us. CONNECT with us. ENGAGE us.
Just no pandering, please.
And this from a fiscal conservative who will vote liberal til she's out of breath...because all other conservative values don't speak to me as a Black woman. At. All.
pat is in denial.
I do not like Amy Holmes at all.
OK but this guy was waaay too defensive. Can you imagine if Barack had been so reactionary to every white politician he meets who are also racist? No. He wouldn't have been able to run such an effective campaign and I know about the Bush handshake/use of sanitizer story from his book. He knew not to do it again!! And why is he a Republican still after he gets the shove off from the party leaders? They want to be the special Negros that do good. http://tinyurl.com/6faqpp
I happened to see this (I almost never watch Matthews) and it was both funny and aggravating at the same time. The thing is, Paul is correct but there is NO way you're going to ever convince me that the Party that actively tolerates the kind of racism that the Republicans do is ever going to be a "big tent party". Unless that tent is gassed with copious amounts of amnesia vapors.
I hope that they continue to trumpet the views of Pat ("oooooooh, I so wish we would go back to the land of cotton, Nixon and Reagan") and Palin because it's a beautiful thing to behold.
Pat Buchanan is everything ugly that a person could be. I watch him and Monica Crowley on the McLaughin Group on the weekends and they spew hatred. He hates to be wrong, rarely admits to it and can find little to say positive about Obama, his campaign to get to the Presidency, or even his children. I remember when the Obama girls were on the first 60 minutes...he said mean, hateful things about their character the next week. Come on Pat, these are children. He's an asshole. Followed by Monica Crowley who's also stuck in the Nixon/Reagan years.
I saw the interview live and I must say Paul had the right to get offended by Buchanan's comment, but then he overreached and displayed too much anger. Buchanan is back to his mean, old GOP ways and doesn't want anything that's going to threaten the country's Anglo-Saxon culture. He makes this point all the time. I have no sympathy for Paul, though, because he's a vicious Repub attack dog himself. When two ferocious Kodiak bears go at it, you just get out of the way and let the fur fly.
Amy Holmes just needs to shut up and just be a model. Don't be shocked if she is in the latest addition of Playboy people. Pat is just an idiot in denial.
In this particular exchange I think Pat's point got lost in his delivery. The democratic party is now proudly wearing the multi-color label it seems to think it has earned. And all of them are getting in on the act of making the repulican party, and by default conservative ideas, as belonging to a monochromatic past. So to concede that the Republican party is the party of old white guys is playing directly into the hands of every liberal talking head on tv. Pat just is not going to do that. Paul was right, the GOP has some serious soul searching in front of it. And some serious diversity issues to work out. But it wasn't that long ago that blacks were mere participants in the DNC. I wonder if blacks at the DNC would have been so comfortable, as matthews described, if one of their own was not on the ticket? It's not really a stretch to say this was a prophetic moment for the black community. I think pat is right that there was nothing they could do to get the black vote this year, and probably not in 2012 either. I think the real challenge for the GOP is not in finding a candidate that can claim the diversity mantle like Obama, can but in removing the personality from the debate and arguing ideas. This is going to be very hard to do. I honestly can not see Republicans getting any leeway until Obama & co. overreach(or as Buckley put it, "go lefty"). I also think that the upcoming administration is very aware that change and not liberalism won the day. It could be a long stay in the wilderness for conservatives.
I'm only a Dem, because The Repugs hate to include anyone but hillbillies....oh, and I'm against the war. But, I am all for fiscal conservatism and personal responsibility. I really don't see any way the Repugs will do enough to convince minorities that they won't get lynched because of the outrageous spectacle of the McCain campaign.
i saw this and laughed at Mike Paul...why should Pat Buchanan acknowledge anything is wrong with the Republican Party.
I think the problem is Mike Paul can't believe he's in the service of this old rancid retrograde piece of humanity.
Maybe Amy Holmes will go to Alaska and help Palin get ready for 2012?
I think Mike Paul was being a punk in this interview. I kinda appreciate that Pat isn't fakin' the funk about reaching out to black people and latinos.
And I think Mike Paul is a do-do head for thinking talking about reaching out to blacks and hispanics is going to make a difference especially after this election where they made it clear they're not interested in making any special appeals.
Plus, he misheard what Pat said, got all offended and then acted like a biatch. It's his own stupid fault for being in the Republican Party anyway. They don't even stand for the things they claim to stand for and they're not interested in negroes.
Have the tokens not looked around the room and noticed they're the only ones there? I'm not saying all blacks s/be Dems forever.
Heck, they could go Libertarian for all I care. I'm actually down with a lot of Libertarian philosophy, but don't go to a vegetarian rally and tell them they need to find ways to reach out to meat eaters, which is what I think Pat was saying.
The Republican platform is simple: low taxes, pro-life, national security, limited government. Pat's saying 'we tried "reaching out" and the results only got worse. We got the message, black and brown folks aren't interested.' To which he says "aiight peace!"
In response to the second anonymous. I think the Republican party's perception as a redneck party should be laid at the feet of the bush clan. Daddy bush couldn't convince the old reagan hands that he was a born again reagan conservative so they had to rev up the other end of the party. The end result being conservative intellectualism appearing to be a contradiction in terms.
As far as Repug hope of tent building. I think it is entirely in Obama's hands. I don't think it's a stretch to say that the black and youth vote got him elected. Well....people get older and I think he still has some realness tests ahead of him with the black community. I still maintain that Michelle is his ticket with the black community and were he married to a white or any non black woman the love he got would not have been near as warm. So, in so far as maintaining his electorate I think the outlook is good but just a little fickle. But if he screws up royaly I could see a major hand washing from some of his constituents. This is the first foray into political activity for many of his voters and if he doesn't live up to his billing they very well may want to stay home next time. If this happens it will create an opening for the GOP. It will allow them to move beyond personality and style and present ideas that may resonate with a new set of voters. I just think Obama is way too talented to let that happen.
Also, the "spectacle" of the McCain campaign was in large part, I think, a media creation. I really don't see what was overtly racist about it, other than maybe the redneck lifestyle of Palin. I would argue that it was refreshing to see an actual person and not an ivy league creation as a candidate. I know obama's story and yes it does resonate but he just didn't have that "ghetto fabulous" vibe in the way that Palin could exude "4 by 4" swagger. And when it comes to campaign handlers, let's admit it, it was ametuer night for the GOP. It was a group of Rove underlings getting the chance to be the big dog. A large segment of the GOP establishment stayed away and other segments were already retooling for 2010-12. I don't see what would turn off non-whites specifically. What turned me off is how much it resembled the 1996 campaign of Bob Dole. Oh yeah, the candidate with combat experience has lost in 5 straight elections. That's probably meaningless, I just wanted to throw it in.
Black people who see Libertarians as a good alternative to the GOP crack me up. If the hardcore Libs--who despise government and regs too--got their way, blacks would ride in the back of the bus again and swim at segregated pools in the South. Libertarians would repeal the Civil Rights Act and everything else. BTW, DKan71, when Buchanan said "Why don't you do it?" to Paul, it was attacking him personally. After Paul called Buchanan out on it, he should have left it alone, but he became more angry and turned it into some bizarre accusation that left everyone bewildered. Paul must have had a few Martinis that afternoon. Silly bear.
Anonymous @11:50, the fact that you saw nothing "overtly racist" about McCain's campaign, it would be a waste of valuable time in trying to clue you in. Let me just say the Repubs, though, are diabolically clever in using their code book on voters. You obviously know what the codes are because you said Repubs didn't openly say racist stuff. They never will. They ain't dumb. Sad, misguided, selfish, xenophobic, and prejudiced maybe. I'll give them credit. They know how to communicate their messages very effectively without saying it in an explicit racial context.
draven 7, since we are both responding to this post I'd be interested in knowing how you're time is more important than mine, or is just that time is just so important in general and "cluing" a closet racist in on what they already knows seems pointless? Obviously you don't like what I have to say. It would take a blind person not to see that conservatives have used race as a wedge issue in many previous elections. I am ACUTELY aware of this. I am also well aware of the coded language and around speak these people use so has not to appear racist. I also think that the Obama campaign was and is ACUTELY aware of the ungodly fear white conservatives now have in being branded a racist. It is the scarlet letter of the hillbilly political set. I remain convinced that John Mccain himself ( I am not stupid enought to speak for the party or conservatives as a whole) is NOT a racist. Is that to say his entire campaign was not; of course not. Because one campaign office had a che flag displayed does that make Obama a socialist? Here is a link to a documentary about the grandaddy of racist campaigns.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/atwater/
I still remain interested in what invisible clues from the 08 campaign that make it racist. Or is really just an assumption that it was based on past behavior? I could accep that. I fully concede that a lackluster attempt was made to reach out to minority voters but I believe this was due more to cultural ineptitude than bias.
At the heart of republican campaign strategy is a direct mail list, which was formed using corportate marketing research techniques. They were really the first to incoportate that into politics. The research is obviously aimed at increasing the list with likely voters. Let's be honest here we all know the likely melanin concentration they targeted. All this was relevant and I would say the dominant method until 2004. The internet changed everything and conservatives got caught flat footed. I personally never thought a candidate would advertise indside of xbox live. But the democrats also learned how to reach their likely voter.
I'm droning on and on here but let me finish with this. Based strictly on your last two posts it seems that you think you need to depend on the government to keep you safe from an angry mob of anarchy minded racists. Maybe I'm taking that too far but that's what I gather. I find your faith in government to do this for you perplexing. I can't think of a time in history when this has happened and maintained itself.Or has it has been said many times, liberals think socialism hasn't worked yet because ther right people haven't been in charge. thank you for replying.
Anonymous, I never said my time was more important than yours. They're actually equal. I really don't want to rehash McCain's campaign, so I'll just cite the gist of it, which was to portray Obama as some dangerous Muslim radical. The Repubs used surrogates, robo calls, the internet, and Palin to spread these lies. This is racism, not the kind with the hooded sheets and robes, but racism none the less. Also, I don't look to government to solve my problems. In fact, I really don't expect much from the Obama administration. As a black person, however, I know that governmental policies have provided me with a lot of protection in the last 50 years. Lastly, Atwater--God rest his soul--laid down the floor plans for Rove, who took his racial strategy to a more insidious level. BTW, Atwater had a come-to-Jesus moment before he met his maker and repented of his sins. I'm sure he saw at last how foolish he was.
I disagree with the radical muslim thing but I get it. I think that if racism were the order of the day Rev. Wright would have been manipulated to the fullest. McCain openly refused to go there. But I think that was equal parts lack of racism and awareness of the consequences of being called one. Never the less, it showed a level of civility I think. And yes I do know he had some ads right before election day. An act of desperation not racism. That could have been milked for quite a bit way before then. I only mention Atwater as a reference point for what I feel is true cloak and dagger racism. My point about hope in government was really a reaction to your description of libertarians. Explain to me how that is not fear mongoring in it's own right. I'm not a hard core lib but let's just say I've been to meetings. Libertarians just want to be left the f**k alone. Having an agenda about reestablishing jim crow is pretty ridiculous. That represents a level of activism that is contradictory to the doctrine of the party. I also get where you are coming from with this. It's a step in a direction that you are unsure of the consequences. I just think you are WAY off in where it will lead.
Frankly, Anonymous, I wouldn't have attended Wright's church. To get politically connected and informed about the black community, Obama compromised and became a member. Still, to compare Wright to white racism is not completely fair. Whatever you thought of his militant anti-US government message, Wright's church still had white members clapping and singing in the pews. I doubt you'll find any black faces singing "Old Dixie" at a KKK meeting. Most commentators ingore this fact when they bring up Wright. And McCain did get a few jugs of milk out of the Wright controversy, although he didn't go full throttle on the issue.
The Libertarians scare me because they wouldn't vote for the Civil Rights Act today. They basically think a store owner, for instance, can sell to whomever he wants or segregate his lunch counter if he so desires. And that's just plain wrong to me. Thank God for Uncle Sam.
I'm not comparing wright to white racism. And, frankly, I don't attend klan meetings so I wouldn't know. I think that's a pretty safe bet you're making though. My point was that using race as a wedge issue for whites is all about stoking feelings of resentment and fear. I think their was still quite a bit of mileage left on old Rev that wasn't used. Thus, I really don't feel that race was the top tool in the toolbox for the O8 campaign. I'm not even sure if they had a toolbox. I think their tools might have been strewn haphazardly around the shop, if you get what I'm saying.
I really don't feel that the desire to resegregate is a top priority for libs. If you follow the logic of libertarianism out then sure that could happen. You seem to feel rather strongly and are informed about this. If I said anymore I would be blowing smoke. But I will get back to you.
Don't feel sorry for the Brother. He's been a slave catcher this entire political season. So, if he got bitchslapped by the obvious racism of his fellow RepubliKKKan, goody.
I still maintain that Michelle is his ticket with the black community and were he married to a white or any non black woman the love he got would not have been near as warm.
If he had been married to Snowflake, he wouldn't even have gotten into the U.S. Senate. That's not a supposition. That's a FACT. From the South Side of Chicago?
Hell no.
To get politically connected and informed about the black community, Obama compromised and became a member.
When Obama joined Trinity, it was NOT politically connected.
I'll repeat.
It was NOT politically connected.
If that had been his purpose for joining a church, there was a list of churches, with preachers who had the number to the Fifth Floor (Mayor's Office).
Jeremiah Wright wasn't on that list.
He got that number, once his congregation grew to 8,000....but, it was given begrudgingly.
If all Obama wanted was political connections, there were a whole lot of other churches he could have joined.
When Obama began going, Trinity was not any mega church. It was just another church on the South Side of Chicago.