Skip to content

Pat Buchanan Should Have Remained On MSNBC

February 17, 2012

While I have deep concerns with Pat Buchanan’s cultural points of view, and find some of his historical interpretations truly disturbing there should still be a place for him on MSNBC.  His removal is not something that makes a progressive-leaning network look good, and surely runs counter to the idea of debating those you disagree with, as opposed to banishing them.

If MSNBC were a serious news network with real journalism taking place like at NBC news or NPR news , one could make an easy case for why the highly opinionated Buchanan should not be an employee.

But let us be honest about MSNBC.

The cable network is far more a political channel than a news operation, and that is fine.  I do not expect MSNBC to cover the world.  So when I turn to them for an update or analysis on  political events they never fail to provide what I need.  But what they do daily is not the stuff that meets any level of objective reporting.  That does not make them good or bad, but let us not confuse what they do with real news reporting.

And that is why Pat Buchanan should have remained on the network.

There is no getting past the point that Buchanan has forgotten more about politics than some of the folks who have shows on MSNBC will ever know.  The former Richard Nixon operative has a most conservative point of view, but also was funny and good-natured, and presented his views with context and punchy lines.

I know that Buchanan has  a real disdain for gay people, and views the civil rights movement we are now engaged in as something that will destroy this nation.  He has a warped sense about minorities, and finds many faults with liberals of all stripes.

But are not those the viewpoints that too many Americans also share, and the reason that MSNBC has programming aimed at making political change?  If MSNBC can not handle one articulate conservative on the network, how can they possibly think they can change a nation?

Pat Buchanan has long had a chair on MSNBC, and the world did not implode.  Perhaps hosts and panelists had to sharpen their views, and concentrate harder to debate him, but no one was the worse for wear when all was concluded.

To me it just looks small and narrow-minded to have bumped Pat Buchanan from MSNBC in the fashion it was done.

What I really do not understand is that Pat Buchanan was removed and Al Sharpton remains!

2 Comments
  1. February 17, 2012 11:00 PM

    agree with Deke

  2. Tim permalink
    February 17, 2012 9:28 PM

    There are better conservative voices.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: