A Brief for Pat Buchanan: The Invincible Race-Baiter

At some point in the last decade or so, the general perception of Pat Buchanan has evolved from that of a screeching bigot to a lovable old codger on MSNBC. A rogue Republican who opposed the invasion of Iraq, Buchanan has duped some liberal cable news junkies into warming up to him as the Friendly Wingnut -- the squinty, high-pitched Spitting Image puppet who somehow managed to win over Rachel Maddow, so much so that he was invited to participate in a reoccurring feature titled "It's Pat" during the early weeks of Maddow's MSNBC show.

Being an occasional observer of Buchanan's Gump-like career for the last 20 or so years, I've sometimes hypothesized that maybe he compensates for his crazier opinions by being extraordinarily charming off the air. How else could he possibly worm his way onto television so often otherwise? Or maybe he's simply a little Tourette's-ish and can't quite wean himself from his more dastardly views -- sometimes accidentally blurting out controversial white supremacist screeds, but then snapping back to a place where his MSNBC colleagues could take him seriously and ask him back next time.

Case in point. During the primary campaign when then-Senator Obama delivered his historic Philadelphia Address, even some conservatives embraced the boldness and profundity of the speech. Not Buchanan, of course, who fired off a column titled, A Brief for Whitey. In it, he referred to the speech as "the same old shakedown" and a "con" from "black hustlers."

He continued by lording food stamps and welfare over the heads of African Americans as kindly gifts from the benevolent white man. "Where's the gratitude?" Buchanan asked -- ostensibly taking credit for programs that he doesn't even support. Food stamps and welfare, in Buchanan's view, should more than compensate for centuries of slavery followed by another 100 years of Jim Crow, lynchings, terrorism, neo-slavery and segregation. Ingrates.

But then, as if the Whitey column never happened, he was back to being the jolly, candy-like geezer who called President Obama's Democratic convention acceptance speech "magnificent" -- and earlier the same day was seen on television grinning from ear-to-ear in his hipster "Blues Brothers" shades while his fellow MSNBC panelists boogied to Stevie Wonder's performance at Invesco Field.

Nevertheless, in the last 10 days or so as Judge Sotomayor moves closer to becoming the first Hispanic justice on the Supreme Court, White Supremacist Pat is back in full voice, and I'm convinced now more than ever that the real Buchanan is definitely not the Friendly Wingnut he's tricked some viewers into believing.

"What is happening now to white men right now," Buchanan said recently on MSNBC about Judge Sotomayor, "is exactly what was done to black folks for years."

This is classic default Buchanan. This is the same Buchanan who supported a white supremacist for the Supreme Court (Harold Carswell in 1970). This is the same Buchanan who incited the anti-black, anti-gay modern culture war during his 1992 Republican convention speech. This is a man whose worldview is so twisted that he honestly believes that white men, a demographic group that's controlled most corridors of global power for centuries on end and thusly enjoyed untold riches, privileges and worship, are somehow being treated like subhuman chattel today. White men, Buchanan believes, are the new second class race/gender.

But that's not exactly the crazy part.

It's the implication of this analysis that so completely disqualifies him from enjoying the respect of any reasonable person on television or off. Buchanan's philosophy appears to be that any minority, ethnic or racial, is only advanced due to the oppression of white men. In other words, it's Buchanan's opinion that minorities aren't generally capable of success based upon their own quality. He seems to be suggesting (and not for the first time) that either minorities conspire to promote other minorities, or a minority is promoted via "Jim Crow Liberalism," as he's called it, on the oppressed shoulders of white men. Backdoor white supremacy, in the latter case -- whites are the dominant race, his theory goes, even when they're being dominated.

While furthering this agenda, and perfectly in line with his favorite anti-Obama word "exotic", Buchanan has been allowed to freely repeat a variety of racial or sexist dog whistles like "anti-white", "quota queen", "tribal" and "that woman" -- even referring to Judge Sotomayor by her first name in his syndicated column (a not-so-subtle trick to diminish her reputation).

How is any of this more acceptable or more serious than "nappy headed hos"? If I were Don Imus right now I'd be changing my adult diaper and shouting, "WTF!" For an oppressed white man, Buchanan is strangely invincible, no?

Which leads us to MSNBC. Inviting Pat Buchanan or Tom Tancredo (who both share a racist employee, by the way) on the air to discuss racial issues while fully aware of their positions in this regard isn't a tip of the hat to both sides, nor does it fulfill any requirement for ideological balance. It's a deliberately incendiary television gimmick, and they're paying Pat Buchanan to do it, even though he and Tancredo hold entirely ludicrous views on race that only really deserve airing in the context of a segment about race-baiting crackpottery. Maybe.

Put another way, it'd be like watching Neil Armstrong walking on the moon in 1969, then Cronkite cutting to an in-studio guest who has a wild theory about how the astronauts are really on a movie set. It'd be like discussing the Ground Zero memorial and inviting Alex Jones into the discussion to rant about controlled demolitions and other truther nonsense.

I can't accept that Pat Buchanan is the only conservative with media training available in Washington and New York on an hourly basis. I mean, thawing him out of his green room cryochamber is every day can't be easy or cheap. But it's not really shocking from the network that's increasingly favoring staged he-said-she-said "smackdowns" over serious journalism and commentary.

Ultimately, though, Buchanan's presence on television is less of a deliberate nod to race-baiting, and more of an acceptance of inside-Washington masturbation. He's familiar and available and he's an emeritus type, so he qualifies for very serious cable news debates. And besides, it's all just a game anyway, right? It's all about the horse race and which player did a better job "closing the deal." The actual substance and systemic harm that's done to the country is irrelevant to the drama of the coverage itself. So when they need an alluring gesturing conservative granddad to augment the drama, thaw out Buchanan and wheel him onto the set. And when they need a shockingly racist monster to amplify the drama, thaw him out and wheel him onto the set. Repeat.

And finally, the next time Buchanan feels like an oppressed minority, perhaps he should take it up with Gene Robinson and Tamron Hall -- the only two African Americans on an otherwise all-white network. Where's their gratitude to whitey? Ingrates.

Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!

Comments

[daddysboy]

You've managed to describe how television works pretty well despite the fact that your obvious purpose was to point out how ridiculous it is for a left-leaning, supposedly progressive cable news channel to trot out racist hate-baiters from the last century in the supposed guise of being somehow neutral. Does someone need to remind MSNBC that America has already been probably irreparably divided by the bush administration and the modern "conservative" movement to the point that political commentators with opposing viewpoints don't even appear on the SAME channels anymore? MSNBC doesn't need a counter-point, they have the news corporation for that!

[Interested01]

Sorry, I couldn't get past the term "Tourette'­s-ish." If you want to be taken seriously, get serious. I'm a big fan of the movie "What About Bob?" That movie presents Tourette's Syndrome in particular and neurological and psychological disorders in general in an unrealistic and medically inaccurate light, but in doing so tells a human if stylized story that is both funny and profound. Your reference to Tourette's Syndrome doesn't shed any light--it just offensively points out how clever you think you are and misses several points at once.

Pat Buchanan is entitled to his opinion. And yes, he deserves to be taken seriously. If John Kerry had taken Pat Buchanan seriously, he would not have been against the Iraq war AFTER he was in favor of it. Don't dismiss Buchanan just because he doesn't share the same guilt feelings that you and I apparently do.

Also, as long as you are presenting yourself as a writer--look up the word "reocurring" in your dictionary. Do you see it? Didn't think so. I'm still a fan, but take a good look at your own biases before you cast aspersions at those who get more air time than you do.

[patnc]

Agree with every word in this article. Old enough to remember PB's racism when he ran for POTUS. I wish he was the only one out there, sadly, that's never going to happen.

I am stealing the paragraph where you use Neil Armstrong reference. Perfect.

[lastcallmd]

News guys and girls--given that the phrase "racist" has become the first resort of anyone you disagree with, it really doesn't have much bang anymore. Sharpton, Jesse, and white guilt ridden liberals have robbed the word of any significant meaning. The more you throw the charge, the less anyone (except the left wing apologists for everything) cares.

So, keep it up. It's less taxing intellectually for you all, and the more you use it, the more its' meaninglessness is highlighted.

[research]

Conservative Anti-intel­lectualism has corrupted many words and concepts in America.

[Emerald1943]

The mute button, I find, is wonderfully useful whenever PB is on! I cannot stand his nasal whining! And to think he wanted to be POTUS!!

[DisgustedTexan]

His hands are tied to his mouth through puppet strings. He has to move his hands up and down before his mouth will move. I wish someone would cut the strings. Amen on the mute button.

[unionave]

Campaigning on racial defamation has the White American way for more than a century . Mostly in the South . Many of those that use this as a way to lift themselves only do it for political reasons . The scary thing about Pat B. is that he really believes and feels his racial defamation and reading what he writes and listening to him talk , race is where he spends a lot of time .

[DragonFly]

"Buchanan's philosophy appears to be that any minority, ethnic or racial, is only advanced due to the oppression of white men."

On the snout!

Whenever I think of Pat, (purposely leaving off his last name in order to diminish his reputation) I think 'shrill' and 'obnoxious'.

Other than that ... he's swell.
Or is that 'swollen'?

[TJCole]

Someone should simply explain to Pat Buchanan that we are all 99.4% exactly the same as a Chimpanzee­..genetica­lly...near­ly identical.­..99.4% the same...

So all of humanity the other .6% is too small for measurement genetically, so as to differentiate in terms of different races in the human species...­!

So scientifically there is only one race, the human race...and as Leakey said recently we are in fact and in reality Apes...sma­rt hairless Apes...!

This should bring pat right around..

[Mdazes]

Thanks you for putting the spot light on this issue. I cant believe that MSNBC is providing a platform for race baiting. I no longer watch MSNBC.

[research]

Why do the 20%'ers get 80% of the mic time?

[Billy Hell]

Aren't there laws against hate speech? If so why aren't they enforced?

[maryyooch]

Isn't the hate speech and race baiting a crime? Incitement to commit_____(fill in the blank)?
Especially the words of people like O'Reilly, Hannity, Kristol, or mainly most of Fox News?
If they could arrest Hal Turner for incitement, why can't they be more vigilant when it comes to others who are just as bad if not worse? I know, I know, Free Speech and all. But there are criminal codes about incitement to riot. Isn't that pretty much the same?

[Democrab]

Buchanan's biggest crime is allowing his name to be on the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach Florida nine years ago. It's all his fault, everything. He laughs about getting thousands of votes in a democratically heavy district resulting in the election of Bush and Cheney. Of course it wasn't his fault that people mistakingly voted for him, but that seemingly evil little laugh still echoes in the political pages of my mind.

[YewNeekId]

I can see where Mexicans might not like Pat Buchanan - he has been very vocal about racist Mexican groups like laraza and the overwhelming flood of illegal aliens.

But throwing mud at Buchanan does nothing to resolve the issue of illegas in the the US who steal social services, medical care, education, housing etc.

[northstar11]

if you are worried about folks stealing american wealth there are larger hunting grounds elsewhere.

start with war profiteering and proceed to the banking crisis.

[StillIRise]

Republicans - or people who sound like Republicans - are always worried about someone stealing something from them. This is why fear has become such a constant companion to them, and why they actually now thrive on it! They're afraid that this group or that group is threatening to steal their guns, their jobs, their medical care, their education and housing, their language, their God ... their country! Blacks, Hispanics, gays, liberals ... they're all out to take something away from the Republican! In fact, this is why they can never be an inclusive party ... they're afraid of anyone who's not like them!!

[Zubeck]

Throwing mud at PB doesn't resolve the illegal alien issue or any other issue, it makes him muddy.
This is about the illumination of the man for what he is. Your point is moot.

Try to keep up.

[vonPinto]

I can't stand Pat Buchanan. I always change the channel to Kiddies Program whenever he pops up on cable TV just to keep my sanity....­.. watching the innocence of kids.

[GEOehms]

Well, Bob, I would demur from stripping Buchanan of his well-earned wingnut status, but I agree with your recasting of his role from "Friendly dotage" to racist consistency: he's a wingnut who stripped his threads from constant torquing and retorquing of his silly white man's burden of reverse discrimination.

Bunnyhead had it half right. Buchanan's "rough spots" stem from his honesty, but he, contra bunnyhead, is honestly a racist, something that had been apparent for many years, as you point out. His brief, and beef, against Sotomayor exhibits the weakness of his case: he must distort her statements to make them mean what he wishes they meant.

She conjectured that her life experience, including being a Latina woman, would make her more empathetic in some situations than a white man who lacked such experiences. That is certainly possible, but it is not guaranteed. First, she must be capable of empathy, and the evidence is that she is; second, some white men would have to lack such empathy, and Buchanan is a good exhibit confirming that some do. Many people of late appear to misconstrue the meaning of empathy, some even trying to make having it a weakness. I would, personally, prefer an empathetic white man over a non-empathetic Latina any day. Fortunately, that is not the choice we face. I like Obama's choice of Sotomayor and want to see her confirmed.

And, yes, I may empathize with the forlorn Mr. Buchanan. May he find peace.

[dimplesmile7]

Poor Pat he never thought he would see an African American president and a latina supreme court nominee in his life time. This must be devastating to him. He has been reduced to defending his whiteness everyday.