Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
And FYI, Pat: it wasn't whites who bled and died to pick YOUR ancestor's cotton fields.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Uncle Pat: Whites were the ones who built America, so we deserve the Supreme Court
Pat Buchanan is the posterboy for ignorant, Southern, racist white men who secretly pine for the Jim Crow days like a heroin junkie craves his next fix. They see people like Sonia Sotamayor and Barack Obama making important strides and breaking barriers that were once thought nearly impossible to bypass, and naturally, guys like Buchanan are freaked that the lever of power they've enjoyed since the birth of our nation is starting to be pried away from their hand. Here's Rachel Maddow exposing Buchanan as the old-school bigot that we all know Uncle Pat is.
And FYI, Pat: it wasn't whites who bled and died to pick YOUR ancestor's cotton fields.
And FYI, Pat: it wasn't whites who bled and died to pick YOUR ancestor's cotton fields.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I bet Pat and Mark Noonan are tight.
Diversity scares the likes of Buchanan completely shitless because it challenges their implicit notion that to be White and Male is to be more deserving of success, privilege and power by default. Where they as a group should be celebrating that equal access for all individuals who excel - whatever their race, gender or creed - raises standards across the board and gives ALL the best and brightest an opportunity to achieve, instead they take refuge in the small-minded notion that any success by a non-white, non-male individual MUST be at the expense of someone else inherently better-qualified. That, effectively, those people given the opportunity to advance must have stolen, rather than earned, their achievements.
Sorry, but I don't believe that Any Given White Male is de facto more qualified than Judge Sotomayor...or student Sotomayor...or applicant Sotomayor. In fact, I know plenty of white males who couldn't hold a candle to her...yet he seems to want to be their advocate, saying that she climbed over their backs to get where she got. That Pat cannot see that this characterization is directly contradictory to the Republican talking point of wanting "the opportunity for everyone to be successful through hard work and dedication" is perhaps the saddest part of this. It is an articulation of a culture not of entrepreneurship but of blame - pointing to others' successes as the raison d'etre for your own failures, regardless of what you did or did not do.
Until he gets past looking at people by conveniently bigoted labels and looking at them by their individual qualifications, Pat is going to be exactly where Rachel correctly placed him - stuck in the 1950s and an ideological relic.
I love Pat and all he's done for the dems....for instance his keynote in 92 for GHWB41.....
He is one of the few repugs who actually speak their (mostly) hidden agenda.....as opposed to bullshitting us about "compassionate conservatives" etc.....
His wife is a nutcase too!
Love em!
Keep talking Pat and thanks to MSNBC for giving him a forum, too! LOL
As it was observed on another blog today - cannot recall which or I would give an enthusiastic H/T - let us not forget that this is the same Pat Buchanan who raved about how qualified Sarah Palin was to ascend to the Presidency if McCain were to win and then to go into decline.
So...the Supreme Court nominee with the most experience on the judicial bench of ANY nominee in recent memory is unqualified, because presumably her successes came from her (unsupported and undocumented) scrambling over so many other more well-qualified white male people? Yet Palin, whose qualifications seem to have consisted of a minor beauty-pageant title, the mayor's office in a small town in the wilds of Alaska, and an undistinguished (except by ethics complaints) half-first-term as Governor, is eminently ready to be one defibrillator away from the highest office in the land?
They're both women. What do you suppose the "one of these things is not like the others?" moment was for Pat? Could it have been related to the levels of melanin in their respective skins?
Maybe Woke is right and every day that Pat keeps opining in the public eye is a good day for rational folk. He certainly seems hell-bent on exposing his own racism without any help at all from the rest of us.
Pat brought up a great point, giving someone a leg up simply because of their race is wrong.
Should we have more whites on the USA olympic basketball team?
Should you go to the proctologist to see if they can locate your head?
So count you are big believer in affirmitive action I take it?
So count you are big believer in affirmitive action I take it?
Asks the man who voted for George W, Bush twice.
Giving someone a "leg up" because of their race is wrong? HaHa.....that's funny right there, considering affirmative action attempts to correct all those white people getting a leg up because their race cooresponds with the employers, eh?
LOL
I'll say it again for the retarded among us. Yet you voted for George W. Bush twice. Maybe it might sink in.
And that's 3 posts I have allowed now your getting bothersome.
I like the name The Jolly Ranger It's so masculine.
Post a Comment