About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Buchanan on Obama's race speech: "We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?"

March 22, 2008 1:42 pm ET

Discussing Sen. Barack Obama's speech addressing race and controversial comments by his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, Pat Buchanan wrote in his syndicated column: "Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American." Buchanan then asserted that "no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans," adding: "We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?"

In a March 21 syndicated column headlined "A Brief for Whitey," conservative commentator and MSNBC contributor Pat Buchanan asserted, "America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known." Buchanan was discussing Sen. Barack Obama's March 18 speech addressing race and controversial comments by his former pastor, Jeremiah A. Wright. He continued, "Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American." Buchanan then asserted that "no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans." Later in the column, Buchanan added: "We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?"

Buchanan repeatedly referred to Obama as "Barack" throughout the column, using Obama's last name only once, in the 27th paragraph.

Buchanan's column, syndicated by Creators Syndicate, was posted on the WorldNetDaily, Real Clear Politics and VDARE.com websites, as well as on his own website.

From Buchanan's March 21 column:

Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America.

Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.

This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:

First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known.

Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.

Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the '60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.

Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks - with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants.

Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks.

We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by tbone (March 22, 2008 1:57 pm ET)
      1  

      Yeah, and what about all you Native Americans?  Get with the program.  White America subsidizes all those spacious reservations you were given so you could build those casinos. 

      Reels the mind.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by socal7425 (March 22, 2008 6:42 pm ET)
          1

        Even for Pat Buchanan this was pretty  breathtaking.  Buchanan says:

         "no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the '60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream."

        Well let's see..our constitution originally designated "black folks" as 3/5 a person, gave them no freedom and severely punished those who tried to achieve it.  Even after we fought a civil war it took another hundred years to get even basic civil and human rights during which time lynching was commonplace it certain parts of the country.  When Pat mentions the trillions spent on welfare, legal services, Medicaid, poverty programs, etc., he neglects to mention that the right wing of this country fought those programs every step of the way.  He also neglects to mention that not one of those programs was designed to help "black folks" but rather to help the poor, regardless of color.  The fact that a disproportionate number of poor in this country happen to be African American speaks for itself.  Now that Buchanan has so boldly exposed himself for what he is will MSNBC's talk hosts continue to treat him as the respected house right-wing blatherer?

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by amirkb (March 23, 2008 7:18 am ET)
            1
          Not to mention the fact that black married couples were not eligible to recive welfare thus contributing to the broken home crisis that is rampant in the black community. This was not true for poor white families on public aide.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 3:49 pm ET)
              1
            And until very recently, interracial marriages were illegal in many states.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (March 23, 2008 1:16 pm ET)
            1
          Unfortunately, yes. Just when you thought Buchannon couldn't get any stupider he goes on tv and says Jesus supports the death penalty.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 8:09 am ET)
              1

            Unfortunately, yes. Just when you thought Buchannon couldn't get any stupider he goes on tv and says Jesus supports the death penalty.

            In a related development, Jesus' publicist released a statement saying that Jesus does NOT support Pat Buchannan.....

            :-)

            Report Abuse
          • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 8:08 am ET)
              1

            Unfortunately, yes. Just when you thought Buchannon couldn't get any stupider he goes on tv and says Jesus supports the death penalty.

            In a related development, Jesus' publicist released a statement saying that Jesus does NOT support Pat Buchannan.....

            :-)

            Report Abuse
    • Author by snoopy (March 22, 2008 2:00 pm ET)
        1
      Let's see now, all those programs Pat mentioned were done without the help of the same right wing racists who now demand that the black man gets down on their knees and kiss Pat's big white @ss. This is pure B.S. because the right has done everything in their power to prevent those programs from succeeding and spent the last 30 odd years calling them every name in the book from lazy to thief. There are still blacks alive today who had to fight in WW2 under the command of a white man because these right wing bigots felt blacks were too stupid to lead themselves. We've continued to maintain a bigoted society reminiscent of slavery and Pat thinks this is the best place in the world for blacks to live? Jeebus H. Christ, most of Europe treats the black man more equally than we do Pat.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bruce1ace (March 22, 2008 2:05 pm ET)
        1  
        We're not even close to the society we were in the 40s and 50s regarding race issues.  Let's at least be honest about the huge progress we are making.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (March 22, 2008 2:14 pm ET)
            1
          Sure, we have made some strides. But you miss the point that it was done dragging the right kicking and screaming the whole way. The one thing that hasn't budged is respect. The right can't swollow their pride enough to be civil, so in the end what's really changed?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bruce1ace (March 22, 2008 2:23 pm ET)
               
            The laws have, most importantly.  Attitudes change over generations but laws change in an instant.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by snoopy (March 22, 2008 2:25 pm ET)
                1
              That's true. But honestly, I don't think we're ever going to have an appropriate discussion on race relations as long as people like Pat want to keep framing the argument as "you took something from me". I have never seen such self centered greed coming from someone who claims to be so religious.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by deeznuts (March 22, 2008 4:24 pm ET)
                1  

                I have never seen such self centered greed coming from someone who claims to be so religious.

                Never?

                Are you serious?

                What country do you live in?

                Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (March 22, 2008 5:19 pm ET)
             
          There is no denying that Bruce. In fact the trend does seem to be in the right direction but heres the thing. What Buchanon is doing is a tactic those like him LOVE to use. IF you criticise those he feels allied with he thinks you have an OBLIGATION to also give a laundry list of all the good things they have done. That is what he means by where is the gratitude. Now if he were talking about opponent and someone criticising THEM also included such a laundry list of all the good things they had done he would go ballistic. Its ok to just make the criticism. It doesnt imply that nothing good has happend or has ever been done by those criticised. Bucanon cant really deny what was said is true so he falls back on this weak argument. Its ok to just deal with THIS part of the picture right now. That is not an implication that the entire picture is one of unremitting evil. Buchanon would like you to believe that is exactly what it means but you can bet your last St Pauli Girl that when HE makes criticisms he doesnt include a laundry list of every good thing done by whoever he is criticising.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by fawltylogic (March 22, 2008 3:53 pm ET)
           

        That is what kills me about this whole thing. The right has ALWAYS opposed every single program that is designed to make life better for people, no matter what the color of their skin is - social security, Medicare, you name it. Then they come here and basically say "look what WE have done for blacks, they should appreciate the progress". Well, rightwingers, you've done NOTHING and you and your ilk (along with far too Many southern Democrats) would have been perfectly happy if nothing had changed since the 60's. Who here can take Buchanan seriously, a man who has no credibility in this area (and very few other areas too)?

        The truth is that without people like Wright, as out of touch his opinions TODAY might be, there would have been NO progress 40 years ago.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by JimmyCraghorn (March 22, 2008 6:32 pm ET)
             

          Many southern Democrats) would have been perfectly happy if nothing had changed since the 60's.

          Yeah, and many of those would prefer the 1860s 

           

          Report Abuse
        • Author by snoopy (March 22, 2008 10:57 pm ET)
             
          Totally agree. The likes of Buchannon have a lot of nerve expecting gratuity for policies they did everything in their power to prevent from happening. Buchannon just needs to say "if it weren't for me you uppity t-i-double guh-ers wouldn't have anything" to wrap up the cracker vote.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by oscar the grouch (March 22, 2008 5:20 pm ET)
           
        Snoopy, who was the Commander-in-Chief during WW2 that could have integrated the Armed Forces with a single signature? Who was the President that was instrumental in segregating Southern Schools in the 1950s? Politics today is far from what it was a couple of generations ago. Yesterdays D (particularly Southern) is todays R, and a lot of yesterdays Rs are todays Ds and I'm sure the future holds more changes in store. Are we as a country where we should be? In a lot of ways, no.  But we are still in many ways the beacon the world looks at and strives to emulate.  We don't suffer from "Balkanizatio" as SE Europe, we are not as poverty stricken as most of the countries on the other continents. Could we do better? Probably, but will we ever do so with the deep political divide in the country today? Probably not. I personally had hopes in 2000 when Bush declared "I'm an uniter." But the policies coming out of WA DC in the past few years have anything but united us.  What will it take?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mefirst (March 22, 2008 9:27 pm ET)
             
          oscar, it was harry truman who integrated the armed forces.  and eisenhower enforced what the supreme court and lower courts told him he had to do, brown vs. board of education.  i've said that there are going to be plenty of things that the right will pounce on in a obama candidacy, including his wife's declaration of being proud to be an american "for the first time in my life".   and there is no problem in pointing out that we have put programs in place, but obama certainly did not need to declare any "gratitude".
          Report Abuse
          • Author by oscar the grouch (March 23, 2008 11:30 pm ET)
               
            I know Truman signed the law, just surprised to find out some time ago that FDR for all his progressive programs had not done so.  And Ike was forced to use military force to enforce segregation because the state governors (at that time mostly D) would not.  There appears over the last couple of generations to have been a switch in a lot of the philosophies of the major parties and those will probably switch again (or become more extreme on both sides) in the next couple of generations. 
            Report Abuse
            • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 8:18 am ET)
                 

              You're forgetting one very inportant thing there, Oscar - the huge philosophical shift that occurred in the two main political parties in the '60s.  Prior to the Civil Rights Movement, there were many liberal Republicans and many conservative Democrats.  Once the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was signed, conservatives line Strom Thurmond left the Democratic Party for the GOP, and many others followed his lead.  And over the years, many moderate and liberal Republicans have found themselves forced out of their own party - and found a new home with the Democrats.

              Bottom line?  It's incorrect to paint this as a Republican-vs-Democrat dynamic.  It's more Liberal/Progressive--vs-Conservative.  The conservatives just switched parties, but they're just as wrong today as they were 50 or 60 years ago.

              Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 24, 2008 10:01 am ET)
             

          You're not kidding.  Take a look at the Sotheast, which I'll define as: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky

          Louisianna, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia.  Following reconstruction, and ignoring the Grant elections, when the democrats were in disarray, [so from 1876] through the 1964 election, these 14 states held a total of 314 federal elections.  In these, the D won a total of 264 of them.  (84%!).  The R won a total of just 45.  (14%!)  In 5 cases a third party candidate won – 4 of these were Strom Thurmond in '48.  R's carried at lest 7 of these 14 states only 2x in 23 elections!  In 9 of these elections, (39%!) they failed to win a SINGLE STATE!  Even in '48, when the Democrats didn’t carry four of the states, those went to Thurmond and his “Dixiecrats.”  In '60, Mississippi, refusing to award it electors to Kennedy, also chose an independent (Byrd) over the R, Nixon!  In both of the cases where the R's carried a majority of these states, they also went on to win the presidency.  However, Democratic SWEEPS occurred twice in LOSING EFFORTS!  And a Democrat who would go on to LOSE to election won at least 7 of these 14 states a total of 10x!  F.Roosevelt never lost a single one of these states in 4 elections, and Wilson lost only 1 in 2 elections.  Adlai Stephenson took 9 of 14 from the very popular Eisenhower in '52!  So to say that the Southest was a democratic lock was an understatement.  

           

          But the wheels were turning… Following Civil Rights Legislation, the SE shifted. From '68 to 2004, these same 14 states held 140 federal elections.  In these, the Republican carried a total of 106.  (76%!)  They failed to capture at least 7 of the 14 only once – in 1976 Jimmy Carter carried 12.  That accounts for almost half of the D victories (29) in the SE since '68.  In '68, all 5 of the states carried by Independent (and civil rights opponent) George Wallace were in the Southeast.  The R's swept the region four times.  George W. Bush never lost a single state.  Reagan lost only 2 in 2 elections, both in '80.  Nixon swept the region in '72.  (But, to be fair, almost swept the entire country.)  The R's also carried at least seven states twice in a losing effort.  (Despite Clinton’s relative appeal in the south he never carried more than 6 of these states.)

           

          So there you go: From 1876 to 1964 the region was 84% Democrat.  And since 1968 it’s been 75% Republican.  There’s your “conservative revolution.”  Six words: Southern. White. Men. Started. Voting. Republican. 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 3:51 pm ET)
               

            Six words: Southern. White. Men. Started. Voting. Republican. 

            And six more words: Southern. White. Men. Still. Burning. Crosses.

            Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 24, 2008 11:05 am ET)
             

          And you can see the opposite happening in the Northeast, which I’ll define as: Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia (which we’ll call a ‘state’ for convenience,) Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont.  From 1876 to 1960 the R's won 160 of 213 federal elections. (75%.)  The R’s swept the region six times in 21 elections.  The region was carried (6 states) by the R all but 4 times.  The R carried at least 6 of the 11 states in a LOSING effort a total of 7x.  McKinley, Harding, Coolidge and Eisenhower never lost a SINGLE STATE.  Hoover took 6 of the 11 states in his bid for reelection against Roosevelt – who won the general election in a landslide!  Wilson carried only 1 state in HIS bid for reelection.

           

          But starting with Kennedy, and going through the Civil Rights era, all that changed as well.  Since 1960 the Democrats have won 92 out of 143 elections.  (64%.)  Take away the Nixon and Reagan landslides (’72, ’80, ’84) and that number goes to 86 out of 107 (80%!.)  Plus: Both of the states carried by McGovern in ’72 were in this region, as was one of the two carried by Mondale in ’84.  Lyndon Johnson, Bill Clinton and John Kerry didn’t lose a single state and Al Gore lost only one and Humphrey beat Nixon 8 to 4 in this region in ’68.  (And Kennedy beat him 8 to 3 in '60.) 

           

          So from 75% Republican to 64% (or 80%) Democrat at about the same time the SE underwent the opposite flip. 

          Report Abuse
          • Author by apapazukamori (March 24, 2008 12:10 pm ET)
               
            I am thoroughly impressed by all that research.  Nice job. :-)
            Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 24, 2008 12:41 pm ET)
             

          This fun/interesting (for me) so I'll continue.  Sorry if this is too far off topic!

          Now, the MIDWEST:

          Prior to 1960 and going back to post reconstruction (1876) the Midwest, defined as Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio and Wisconsin was pretty solidly Republican.  The Republican won 113 of 167 elections in the region (68%), swept the region 5 times, and carried at least 4 or 8 states twice in losing efforts.  In their first runs, Teddy Roosevelt, Taft, Harding, Hoover and Eisenhower didn’t lose a single state.  Coolidge lost only one – to LaFollete, a “Progressive” and Eisenhower lost only one in his bid for re-election.  Franklin Roosevelt lost 7 of  the 16 states in his last two bids for re-election, both of which were landslides nationally. 

           

          Starting in 1960 that changed.  The Midwest became a solid battle ground region.  Republicans have taken 51 election to the Democrat’s 45.  (a 53/47% split.)  The region has only been swept twice – once by Nixon (R), Once by Johnson (D).  It has been split 4/4 four times.  Carter and Mondale both took states in this region from Reagan (well, they each took Minnesota) avoiding a regional sweep in a landside year while Dole and George H Bush took Indiana – avoiding a regional sweep by Clinton in two lopsided, but not necessarily landslide, years.  Missouri and Ohio have gone the winner every year.  While some states are partisan, Minnesota has gone Democrat all but once and Indiana has Republican all but once, most midwest states can be won by either candidate: Illinois is split 6/6 (R/D), Iowa 8/4, Michigan 5/7, Missouri and Ohio 7/5, and Wisconsin 5/7. 

           

          Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 24, 2008 12:42 pm ET)
             

          The Pacific West, defined as Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington was largely immune to the political changes taking place in the 1960’s.  They didn’t shift politically until 1992.  From Reconstruction (1876) to 1956 the Republicans won 41 of the 63 state elections. (65%.)  They won a majority of states twice in a losing effort and swept the region 11 times.  (Although that did not include Alaska or Hawaii until 1952.)  Only Franklin Roosevelt swept the region for the Democrats and while he did this four times, and all four elections were national landslides.  So the region was pretty solidly Republican.

           

          And from 1960 to 1988 not much changed.  Republicans still won 30 of the 40 state elections - 75%.  If anything, the region went more Republican!  This is only strange in that in recent elections it’s been a lock for the democrats, but more on that later.  Nixon lost only two states in three elections – Kennedy took Hawaii and Humphrey took Washington.  Reagan never lost a state and Ford only lost one (Hawaii.)  Alaska (which, politically is more of a Mountain state) has gone to a Democrat only once: to Johnson in his ’68 landslide.  And “liberal” California? They had an identical voting record to Alaska!  Cali also went Republican every year except 1968!

           

          But since 1992 things have changed.  Clinton, Gore and Kerry each carried every state, every year except Alaska, which remained solidly republican.  That a shift from 75% Republican from 1960-88 (After being 65% Republican from 1876 to 1960) to 80% Democrat 1992-2004!

          Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 24, 2008 12:44 pm ET)
             

          The Mountain states (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming) have always been, and remain, virtual Republican locks.  Overall, since 1876 the state elections have gone to the Republican 70% of the time. (247 out of 353.)  In 33 elections the Republicans have swept the region 16 times, including once in a losing effort.  They’ve carried a majority of the region twice in losing efforts, and split it twice more in losing efforts.  (And in one of those, 1892, they took four states while the Progressive took 4.  The (winning) Democrats only took one – split in a three way tie!)  The only Democrats to solidly carry the region mainly did so in lopsided notional victories: Johnson in 64, took all but Arizona (Goldwater’s home state); Roosevelt swept the region in his first two election but battles in the last two, winning just 13 of 24, both national landslides; and Wilson won 10 of 12 and 11 of 12 in each of his runs.  But aside from those strong democratic campaigns (regionally and nationally) the only anomaly is William Jennings Bryan who took 9 of 10 states for the Democrats in 1896 in a losing effort.  Clinton never carried more than 4 states in both of his lopsided national victories.  Carter never got a single one in either bid.  Kennedy got only 2 in 1960.  On the other hand: Reagan, Ford, Eisenhower, Hoover, Coolidge, Harding and Teddy Roosevelt never lost a single state for the Republicans while both Bush’s and Nixon, swept the region at least once and lost only seven states in seven elections between them.  And since 1952 the Republicans have won 87% of the state elections, with over half (11) of the 21 losses coming in ’64 to Johnson.  Take that year out and the region goes to 94% Republican since 1952.

           

          ................................

           

          So that's everyone! The SE & NE flipped in the 1960's, the MW went from solidly Republicna to a battle-ground at the same time, the Pacific states went Dem in the 1990's (not the 1960's!) and the Mountain states have always been, and remian, Republican territory.

           

          Sorry if I got carried away!

          Report Abuse
          • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 4:14 pm ET)
               

            So that's everyone! The SE & NE flipped in the 1960's, the MW went from solidly Republicna to a battle-ground at the same time, the Pacific states went Dem in the 1990's (not the 1960's!) and the Mountain states have always been, and remian, Republican territory.

            But the Mountain States seem to be trending blue.  Foe example, Colorado used to be infested with Republicans - now both house of the Legislature have been under Democratic control since 2005, and Democrats are the majority part in teh Congressional Delegation and hold almost every state-wide office.

            Report Abuse
      • Author by apapazukamori (March 24, 2008 12:05 pm ET)
           
        If you search around his page more, you'll find his rant on European "diversity" and how it's more trouble than it's worth.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by steeve (March 22, 2008 2:05 pm ET)
         

      Wars, bailouts, and interest on the national debt drown poverty spending.

      Others here will cite Buchanan's more obvious errors, which come in at least four major categories.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jimdavis1959940 (March 22, 2008 2:28 pm ET)
         

      "Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America. Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to. ... We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?"

      There are grievances that black America needs to hear and remedy. Let's start with crime and drugs.

      In the 1930s, '40s and '50s, there were lynchings. Unemployment among African-Americans reached 50 percent. There were separate drinking fountains and blacks couldn't sit at certain lunch counters. They had to move to the back of the bus. But the crime rate among blacks was a tiny fraction of what it is now.

      Rates of violent crime, alcoholism and drug abuse are far higher among African-Americans than among whites. They are far higher than they were among blacks during the Great Depression. So don't blame poverty and don't blame Whitey.

      Then there's the dropout rate. Acadamic achievement isn't considered stylish among some African-Americans. Those who excel are accused of not being black enough. Only athletic and musical achievements are recognized.

      Hand in hand with these problems is the problem of fatherless black families.

      If more black fathers would stay at home, raise their children, make sure they stay in school and study, and set a good example for them, there would be fewer black teenagers dropping out of school, turning to crime and to drugs.

      These are fair grievances. And they need to be addressed and resolved. All the white guilt and reparations in the world will never make a bit of difference. It is behavior among African-Americans that has the greatest need for change.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by gg (March 22, 2008 2:34 pm ET)
         
      "This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard." Pleeeeeeease, that's all we do hear. The Silent Majority turned into the vocal minority a long time ago
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (March 22, 2008 2:36 pm ET)
           
        Right about the time they discussed having the government issue a formal apology for slavery I believe. So Pat, you want gratitude? Where's the apology?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by wookie (March 22, 2008 2:52 pm ET)
         
      Typically odious Buchanan stuff. First off welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs aren't exclusive to blacks and were first aimed only at whites. Second, any help offered blacks was essentially a late payment for their labor on plantations. But hey, we gave them Christian salvation!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by LarryE (March 22, 2008 2:57 pm ET)
         

      <i>Buchanan repeatedly referred to Obama as "Barack" throughout the column, using Obama's last name only once,</>

      I suppose we should be grateful he didn't call him "boy." 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by factsrstubborn (March 22, 2008 3:31 pm ET)
         
      As Barack Obama said in his speech, the progess was made "...through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk..."  So the last thing, the very last thing, that should be asked of an African American man or woman is gratitude.  What an elitist, insensitive, pompous ass Buchanan has again shown himself to be.  Oh, and throw in two tablespoons full of stupid.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by MickD (March 22, 2008 3:44 pm ET)
           
        Pat apparently has gone deaf and blind. Is there ANYONE in this country you in their heart of even the hardest of hearts, believe this?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (March 22, 2008 3:38 pm ET)
         
      Self serving patsy
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Billy Hill (March 22, 2008 4:19 pm ET)
         

      I am watching this debate from afar....there is nothing I could add to its value. However. I am not unique in that I never layed eyes on a person of color until the age of 18. I have never known, personally, a person of color. I am in my 50's. It so happens that where I grew up and chose to live (in eastern Oregon) there are no persons of color. Question: What do I owe this group the rest of you identify as "people of color"? If I owe where do I send the check? How much? Can I make payments IF it is more than I have saved? Last point: Why would some one like me who has lived as I want to, where I want to, have any desire to enter your world of hate, angst and turmoil?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by thomp.steve9098 (March 22, 2008 4:46 pm ET)
           

        Personally I don't think you owe anybody one red cent.  Nonetheless, in my opinion, you should care whether Americans of all racial and ethnic groups are treated fairly, and are not antagonistic toward one another.  It stands to reason that "getting along" is inherently necessary in making our nation, complete with a multitude of races and ethnicities, strong and prosperous

        Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (March 22, 2008 5:23 pm ET)
           
        You owe them what you owe EVERY human being. Their dignity and a bit of respect. You owe it to them to see them as human beings like everyone else. I didnt see anything more being ASKED of you. IF this is too much trouble than the problem is YOURS.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by worrierking (March 22, 2008 7:06 pm ET)
           
        As someone who's lived where and how you wished to live, you might want to stop and thank the many people of color who died serving your country to protect your choices.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by thomp.steve9098 (March 22, 2008 7:12 pm ET)
             

          Not that he should, but if he were to begin thanking people for protecting his rights and so on, why should he limit his thanks to people of color, as you imply?

          Report Abuse
          • Author by worrierking (March 22, 2008 7:26 pm ET)
               
            He should not limit his thanks.

            His post implied that since he lives in an all white area and he's never had many dealings with non-whites, he doesn't them anyone anything.

            Every one of us owes a debt to those who've come before us, in the workplace, in the military and in our neighborhoods. None of us would be where we are today if generations of people of every race and creed had not fought for what we take for granted today.

            Society struggles together to make life better for those who follow us. We can't all just go off in the woods and declare that we owe no one anything.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by thomp.steve9098 (March 22, 2008 7:44 pm ET)
                 
              for the record, I tend to agree with your sentiments, even though I generally don't go around giving thanks to the dead . . .
              Report Abuse
              • Author by worrierking (March 22, 2008 7:49 pm ET)
                   
                I don't usually either.

                It's more of an appreciation and understanding than an actual thank you..
                Report Abuse
            • Author by rumplestilskin396408 (March 22, 2008 7:57 pm ET)
                 
              hear, hear.  well said.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by steeve (March 22, 2008 7:19 pm ET)
           
        We don't need reparations.  Just government policy aimed at raising the median income and lifting the poor of all ethnicities, which in my lifetime has happened ONLY under Clinton.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by FrankBlackFrancis (March 22, 2008 4:28 pm ET)
         
      Where is the gratitude? Well massa' Pat, I believe it was in the speech Obama gave when he said he wouldn't be where he was today if not for the great country he lived in. As in the United States of America. It seems Pat wants the due most white men want. I'll offer it, even though I am as pasty white as Casper the ghost. Thank you to all my white masters for committing genocide on the red man, using manifest destiny as your excuse, and enslaving the black man, using economic necessity as your excuse, for giving a halfrican the opportunity to run for president. I says thank you so much for you nice conservative white folk for helping me out so's I had the chance to runs for the highest position in the worlds. Thanks you se so much massa Pat for allowing me, as an American citizen with Constitutional protections enacted by liberals to protect me from your racist ideology so's I could run for President of the USA. I am so grateful that white liberals like Thomas Jefferson on down the line had the courage to stand up to bigots like you so a black man form a broken home could go to Harvard law school, and go home to fight for justice in the streets and represent people in my home town on the State level successfully enough to be able to get elected to the US Senate and eventually run for President. Oh thank you so much whitey, er I mean massa' Pat. "Cause conservatives like you fought me every step of the way as liberals who fought for my rights. Thank you for.....nothing, massa Pat.Pat Buchanan, what an ass. 
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bruce1ace (March 22, 2008 4:56 pm ET)
           
        You're referring to liberal and slave owner Thomas Jefferson, I assume?  You forgot that one thing.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by princeofwheels (March 22, 2008 5:39 pm ET)
             
          Brucetheeditor, is there anything else you found wrong with his post? Or does that make it all irrelevant? Thank God for Pat Buchanan..without fair-minded people like him, where would this country be? Thank You Pat, you are the instrument and heartbeat of America. I only wonder what you would be saying if you were running on the Repo ticket against Sen. Obama?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bruce1ace (March 22, 2008 6:51 pm ET)
               

            My post doesn't make his post irrelevent.  I didn't think his post was particularly fair and balanced but that's just my opinion.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by zamfir273114 (March 22, 2008 6:06 pm ET)
         
      I see what Pat is saying. Nobody ever talks about the "good" in this country. Lots of countries are still archaic when it comes to racial and ethnic relations. Consider the Palestinians and the Israeli's, Croations, Muslims, Serbs, etc. Consider the African nations that are still ethnically clensing. Irish vs. English. Etc.

      The U.S. is not perfect, but what country is?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Brabantio (March 22, 2008 6:28 pm ET)
           
        So because we're better off than the Israeli/Palestinian relationship, there's no room for criticism?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (March 22, 2008 9:27 pm ET)
           
        No one ever talks about the GOOD in this country? I assume you have been in a coma for the last thirty years. I hear constantly about the good we have done and we do, we give more money, we saved Europe, the US is the greatest country in the world. I hear this nearly constantly. What rightwingnuts mean when they say that is WWWAAHHHHH why dont you conform and ONLY say these things. They are certainly said often enough but if there is EVER, ANY criticism about the US I hear some braindead wingnut tell me that no one ever talks about the GOOD the US does. Yeah, its talked about. If you havent heard it then you dont speak English.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by pearlene_scott1602 (March 23, 2008 4:22 pm ET)
           

        The U.S. is not perfect, but what country is?

        I remember being 14 years old and paying my 15cents to ride the bus just like everyone else but I could not sit in those first 10 seats. I remember asking my father why I had to go to the back of the bus when I paid my 15cents just like everyone else. He said those were the rules and that was the law and I had to follow the law. That year was 1948. When I hear Rev. Wright I understand, life was much harder for a young black man than a young black woman. Because white men felt threaten, they treated black men extremely harsh. In 1955 a 14 year old black child, Emmett Till was visiting relatives in the south, Emmett was from Chicago. He was taken from his uncle’s house in the middle of the night, a common practice, murdered. I remember hearing stories of that Emmett was murdered because he whistled at a white woman. A 14 year old child taken from his home in the middle of the night, beaten, shot and thrown in the river. THAT is my American history and I should be grateful that some white folks decided the treat black folks like they were human?

        I don't expect anyone to pay for the past deeds of some white folks but  stop pretending that it didn't happen. Don't ask me to not look back, unlike you my American history is not filled with the 4th of July and apple pie, my history is paying the same price as white folks to ride the bus but being told that the law says I have to sit in the back. I don't tell these stories to cause white guilt, I tell them because THEY are my American history. No one can deny the progress we have made as a nation but don't try to act like it came easy, it didn't. Pat and folks like him had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future that allows equal treatment of blacks. THIS IS MY AMERICAN HISTORY While I'm glad things have changed it's immoral to forget those who died to make it happen. Grateful? Yeah I'm grateful everyday to those who stood up and decided to not take the abuse anymore. I'm grateful to those who fought and died so that my children could pay their 15cents and ride in those first 10 seats. Grateful?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (March 24, 2008 2:22 am ET)
             

          Thanks, Pearlene. And could you please hang around this planet a while longer, so the head-in-the-sand contingent has to face up to the fact that these things aren't ancient history? Thanks.

          They're not all evil, Pearlene. Just frightened and not up to my manly standards.But you know that, right? ;0)

          Report Abuse
      • Author by apapazukamori (March 24, 2008 12:30 pm ET)
           

        That argument only serves to further the complacency and arrogance that's gotten the U.S. into so much trouble.  Just because American domestic policies have made strides in some areas does not mean those policies are perfect, and should not be a reason to stop calling for their improvement.  Take the sty out of your own eye before commenting on your neighbor's.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (March 22, 2008 6:33 pm ET)
         
      Oh, I'm sorry Pat.  I would like to thank White people who found it in their hearts to stop treating Blacks like dirt.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by rumplestilskin396408 (March 22, 2008 7:56 pm ET)
           
        well, there were also a lot of whites who died so that slavery could be abolished.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by apapazukamori (March 24, 2008 12:32 pm ET)
             

          A lot more blacks died because slavery wasn't abolished sooner.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by Brabantio (March 22, 2008 6:49 pm ET)
         

      "Untold trillions have been spent since the '60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream."

      If someone owes you something, saying "thank you" for following through on that is a formality at best.  Buchanan himself points out we brought them here as slaves, but they owe us gratitude for fulfilling the obvious moral obligation of establishing equality?  We owe them that.  We would deserve the harshest criticism if we didn't make these efforts.

      It's sort of like criticizing your mother for drinking too much and getting a lecture on all the meals she's provided you (which you said thank you for every time anyway).  What's the alternative, you were going to supply your own food at eight years old, or what?  The gratitude is there, but that doesn't mean you can't point out problems. 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Jah Melku (March 23, 2008 12:15 am ET)
           

        That about sums it up perfectly.

        While Black Americans are proud of the good their country has achieved, they are still mindful of the fact that that same country has and is still willing to screw them over (individually or Katrina scale) on a whim. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (March 22, 2008 6:56 pm ET)
         
      Social contract, mutual altruism, respect for your fellow citizen, human. Even way out where you are. I grew up in the NW myself. My life would be alot less interesting and fruitful without the input and friendship of lots of people whose skin color and ancestry is different than mine.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Cartoon Messiah (March 22, 2008 7:17 pm ET)
         

      Guess what, all you racist yokels:

      Obama does get to have it both ways. He has both white and black family members, and thus has every right to speak candidly on both ethnicities (which overlap more often in American history than people like to admit). I am half Spanish and half English, and I have lots of Americans in my family too. So I get to say "typical Spaniard" or "typical Briton" or "typical American". Why? because I have known many, experienced their customs, and know from whence I speak.

      You...Don't.

      So STFU.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by steve10664326 (March 22, 2008 8:01 pm ET)
         

      Randy Newman discussed this topic in the song Sail Away:

      In America you'll get food to eat
      Won't have to run through the jungle
      And scuff up your feet
      You'll just sing about Jesus and drink wine all day
      It's great to be an American

      Ain't no lions or tigers
      Ain't no mamba snake
      Just the sweet watermelon and the buckwheat cake
      Ev'rybody is as happy as a man can be
      Climb aboard, little wog
      Sail away with me

      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay
      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay

      In America every man is free
      To take care of his home and his family
      You'll be as happy as a monkey in a monkey tree
      You're all gonna be an American

      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay
      Sail away
      Sail away
      We will cross the mighty ocean into Charleston Bay

      Report Abuse
    • Author by pbg (March 22, 2008 9:39 pm ET)
         
      If this were a tort case, the atrocities that the United States of America committed on those of the 'black race', as it was once called, would be grounds enough to liquidate the US and put it up for auction to pay the damages. (if Monsanto goes under because of a little thing like asbestos, think of what slavery would cost!)

      At very least, the USA should have expropriated the property of the traitors who actually waged war on thecountry, murdering millions of loyal Americans. But they were allowed to keep their property and force the former slaves into sharecropper status--not too far different from their previous state. And after the secret deal that resolved the Hayes-Tilden election removed federal troops from the south, the brutal oppression ramped up to last for close to a HUNDRD YEARS. And all in violations of America's stated principles, if not the law itself. Had the Union turned the property of the traitors to their former victims , that might have been some reparation--but despite their capital crimes against the United States, folkss just couldn't see taking property away from White Men.

      Pat Buchanan's argument translates thus. "Hay, look, I'm sorry I ran over your little girl with my car. The brakes failed, and I had them fixed. So we're square, right? Cost me a bundle to get them fixed!"

      The non-explicit agreement that evolved (as was pointed out, over the screams of the Racist Right) was not to try to compensate for the crime, but to work to undo the damage that had been wrought . Damage that had been openly and brutally going on untill only 40 years ago--and continues today.

      Sorry, Pat, but you don't get to say 'I'm tired of writing these checks! And The guy never thanks me for them! He's damaging me now!" THat all is part of the damage settlement. You're getting off easy for what you did, and if you thing preferences in college enrollment is equivalent to what you did, you've got another think coming.

      And as a matter of fact, Mr. Buchanan, as Jena, LA shows, you haven'teven gotten the brakes fixed.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by SpacegirlArt (March 22, 2008 11:22 pm ET)
         

      I have a question....

       

      And although I don't agree with Buchanan in his phrasing at all in this, what I WOULD like to know is where is the outrage in the Black Community if the 13th District of Chicago, when, under Senator Obama's watch, $100 Million dollars was allocated to Tony Rezko to refurbish and make livable about 13 low-income housing structures, that afterwards ended up with no heat or water or ither services, while Senator Obama sat i his Rezko-financed mansion in the district? Where was the outrage from Pastor Wright AND HIS CONGREGATION OF 8000 in the SAME COMMUNITY when the plight of these AMERICANS was going on?

       

      It is true that "White America", like "Black America" has neglected its responsibility in many areas, and the treatment of the African American community has been unlike any other in our history. But when Black America screams rage at White America, and the Senator from Illinois i"doesn't know" and "hasn't heard of" these people right under his nose, and BILLIONAIRE Oprah Winfrey builds a school for girls in Africa when the American public schools are crumbling, my sympathy for the current issue is tempered.

      We have a long way to go, but one cannot always look outward to fix the problems.  And one needs to stop looking at government for a handout -  Like Rezko did, and like Obama helped to get for HIM, while ignoring the citizens of his own district.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by nycjew49 (March 22, 2008 11:28 pm ET)
         

      I wonder if Pat Buchanan would hold the same opinion if he had been born Black in a ghetto in washington DC in 1938 instead of White.   I wonder if he would perceive Reverand Wright's words differently if he had grown up under the same conditions and walked a mile in his shoes. 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by renata856 (March 22, 2008 11:43 pm ET)
         

      Clarity is a good thing. Pat Buchanan's contrasting his views with that of Barack Obama's provides clear lines for ALL Americans to choose the racist, divisive politics of the past -- or move forward into the future. We have 44 mil Americans w/no health insurance, a $3 trillion dollar war to pay for in REAL money-not the debt we have piled up during the Bush/Cheney debacles, 79 million baby boomers turning 60 beginning 2008-rushing into a very unstable retirement and third-age, a devalued dollar against the world's currencies, mortgage crisis eroding home values, crumbling infrastructure/bridges/levies and Katrina rebuilding unfinished, unregulated hedge-funds/investment banks requiring tax-payer bailouts and two wars to END.  China, India and Europe -- Nations we helped in the 20th Century, are the beneficiaries of our jobs, technologies, etc. They are preparing their children for a competitive 21st Century. The world is turning their backs on us because we continue to allow men such as Mr. Buchanan race-bait and distract us every four years.  Mr. Buchanan has distracting Americans w/race-baiting since he was in the Nixon Administrations. He laughs at the butterfly ballot that confused Democrat seniors in Florida in 2000. He constantly applies his brilliant intellect to destablize (backing Hillary over the last couple of weeks) and manipulate. If we allow him -- and I mean Republicans, Independents and Democrats alike -- to distract us at this moment in time, we will deserve to go downward, leaving our children second class citizens in the NEW WORLD ORDER George H. W. Bush ushered in with the help of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.  Americans of every stripe should REPUDIATE this message and ANY media outlet that publishes or puts him on air. Why does MSNBC allow him to comment on a Democratic Nomination process? He has NO CREDIBILITY. Turn the page, America. Our children are depending upon us!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by renata856 (March 22, 2008 11:54 pm ET)
         
      Addendum:  Mr. Buchanan's statement should be posted on John McCain's website so Republican, Independents and "Reagan" Democrats KNOW what they are voting for -- and stand for.  It should be nailed to the RNC's door and posted everywhere Republicans speak while running for Congress or the Senate, in every City and State. Be PROUD of who you are and what you stand for -- as Mr. Buchanan is. Then, those of us who do not share these views can turn the page on you, as well -- and take our Nation on a path to a unified, successful future. Mr. Buchanan is holding America back and THAT is a crime, unpatriotic and pathetic -- with what we have on our plate. Worse, HE IS MAKING MONEY OUT OF THIS RACE-BAITING FOR THIRTY PLUS YEARS.  Let's end his commoditization of pitting us against one another...beginning this Easter and Passover season! Turn the page!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by dandrea (March 23, 2008 12:46 am ET)
         

      I have heard many people complain about crumbs we give to blacks but it is astonishing to me that Buchanan asks , "Where is the GRATITUDE?".  Thank him for what ? God given rights are not Buchanan's to give.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dandrea (March 23, 2008 12:48 am ET)
         

      I have heard many people complain about crumbs we give to blacks but it is astonishing to me that Buchanan asks , "Where is the GRATITUDE?".  Thank him for what ? God given rights are not Buchanan's to give.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Cheney2012 (March 23, 2008 3:01 am ET)
           
        There is no God-given right for a governmental authority to CONFISCATE what somebody has earned and GIVE it to someone else. 
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Col. Harlan Sanders (March 23, 2008 3:56 am ET)
             

          Does that mean I can quit subsidizing Pat Buchanan's church with my tax dollars?

          Seriously, i'm getting pretty tired of hearing people, especially white people (and I'm one of them), tell other people who they should denounce and who they should thank.Quite a few centuries have gone by with everybody doing everything they could to make the minority in power comfortable, but as soon as a few start speaking out about things, whiners like Buchanan think they're being victimized. Stinkin pansy.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Cheney2012 (March 24, 2008 6:10 pm ET)
               

            How do you subsidize his or anyone's church?  Just because a non-profit organization is tax-exempt the taxpayers are not subsidizing it.  If they are receiving direct payments from the treasury that is a diferent matter.

            Is the United Way tax-exempt?  The American Cancer Society?  Do you believe you are subsidizing them? You're making a bogus argument.

            Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (March 23, 2008 5:15 am ET)
             

          Is it confiscation when you pay your electric bill? Is the governemnt going to stop confiscating MY money and giving it to defense contractors and corporate America? Or is it only confiscation when the money is not used the way conservatives WANT it used? Taxes are the price we pay for living in a society. IF that is too burdensome for you I suggest you go find a corner of the Amazon jungle and escape all that confiscation. If you LIVE in a society and benifit FROM it. Drive on its roads are protected by its military, police, fire depts educated by it and STILL talk this confiscation nonsense then you are an idiot and a selfish one at that.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by Cheney2012 (March 24, 2008 10:36 pm ET)
               

            SOLON:  I'm willing to pay for the electricity I use.  The rates have doubled where I live in the last year.  And why?  The legislature in my state instituted a phony electricity deregulation several years ago that put the power-supply company out of the power-generating business.  We generate almost no power in this state and buy it elsewhere.  Meanwhile this same power company monopoly owns hydro rights to our waterways, But radical environmentalists will not let them harness the rivers because it might damage the delicate eco-system.  And even worse the legislature -- 80 percent Democrats -- will not change the law to allow smaller power companies to form co-ops and provide power to just a few thousand homes at very reasonable rates. You see, the lawmakers of BOTH parties like those campiagn contributions from the big power company.

            Take this situation -- and a similar story exists with other issues -- and juxtapose it next to those who complain the loudest about high electricity costs.  They are from the group I call the BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE.  They usually make quite a bit more than people like I do, so the electric bill certainly doesn't bite them as hard. They still complain.  BUT when reasonable solutions are presented they oppose them because we certainly can't build a new power plant in our pastoral state and the evil power company can't actually make more money if we freed them up to produce power.  Therefore nothing gets done to solve the problem and the politicians pander to these people and are rewarded with perpetual re-election.

            As for the other uses of taxpayer money: Defense?  That's a proper role for the federal government.  I agree it should not be wasted and these contractors are way too cozy with the gov't no argument there.  Corporate Welfare is a hideous scourge.  I AGREE with you.  We hand out money for companies to market new products among countless other things and it's not right.  However, corporate income tax is paid by us in the form higher prices so I'm really not opposed to cutting those taxes as I believe economic growth is sure to follow as we the citizens will keep more of their own money.

            Roads and fire and police departments: Of course we should band together to pay for these.  Problem is I pay about 61 cents a gallon where I live between Fed and State gas taxes.  I just don't see the benefit of that cost because the roads are falling apart here. And why?? Because that money ends up in a general fund and is never dedicated to roads.  If it went to roads fine I would not argue. If we paid a police officer more than $40,000 a year fine I won't argue with that either.  But so often this money goes to support a gov't benefit and pension gravy train.  My healthcare contribution is 47% of the premium.  My company pays 53%.  The amount I pay went from $190 a paycheck to $208.  That's about 9 percent.  My co-pays for doctor visits and prescriptions went up 20 and 33 percent respectively.  For the gov't employees?  They pay 0% percent of their premium.  The taxpayers pay it ALL.  Co-pays are about $5, if that.  What's wrong with this picture?  And while I did not get a raise these workers are getting about 5% raise per year.

            I guess my larger point SOLON is how much is ENOUGH?  Where do we draw the line?  One post I read somewhere on this site said in effect "some congressmen got together and thought it would be a good idea"  Is EVERYTHING a good idea?  While it would be great if everyone had free healthcare and all the food they wanted and a nice house to live in.  But we can't have that kind of country without going bankrupt and/or destroying the work ethic that brings in tax revenue and makes gov't spending possible.  That's why we should be prudent on what we spend our money on.  If we don't defend the nation, build and maintain infrastructure, provide for local safety and security (police, fire, courts) and provide educational opportunities, then we don't have a country. Spend the money on those things.

            And finally I guess the larger philosophical point is that we as a society have assigned "rights" to too many things. Whether it's a right to healthcare, right to a job or a certain standard of living.  These rights just don't exist and it isn't feasible to confer these rights on the people. That's what I was getting at when saying there is no RIGHT to have the GOV'T take from your brother and GIVE to you.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by solon (March 25, 2008 6:13 am ET)
                 
              Well then we arent that far apart overall. Its silly to call taxes confiscation. They are the price we pay to HAVE a society as opposed to a bunch of people living in the same geographic area. Since the FACT is if we had Canadas single payer system it would cost LESS money and since we are pretty much the ONLY industrial country in the world without healthcare provided to all citizens and we are the richest country in the world I dont buy that we cant  afford it. The last study I saw said 18,000 Americans a year DIE because of lack of access to healthcare I say THAT is a high price to pay. I WANT my taxes to feed the hungry and promote the general wellfare. I think investing in people is a good idea and has a good return. Government isnt a candy store and I am not saying everyone should get whatever they want but I agree with the Bahia who say the day will come when no one can sleep as long as one child goes hungry. I think the day WILL come when people who say that the needy should just suffer will be looked at with pity instead of being taken seriously. We dont bat an eye at spending a trillion dollars to invade a country that didnt need invading and begruge those who are hungry food. I dont like the priorities. We are building a whole new generation of fighter jets when no other country in the world is making new fighter jets. We are building a new Aircraft carrier that the Pentagon said they dont need. Our priorities are skewed. I am all for a good defense but when is enough enough. We spend almost as much on defense as the rest of the world combined when our most pressing enemy is fighting us with boxcutters. Again we arent that far apart. I dont want to make it easy for charlatans to take advantage of our largesse. I DO want the needy helped. We spend TWICE as much on corporate wellfare as social wellfare. This country has always had socialism for the rich and too often complains when the really needy get ANYTHING to help them in any way. It seem our disagreement is mostly a matter of degrees. Feed the hungry. Make those corporations that benifit from the public cost private profit gravytrain give back in responsibility. Stop avoiding taxes by going offshore in name only, STOP violating environemental and labor laws. As for your argument about corporate taxes it is a talking point that power WANTS you to repeat endlessly and it is not based on facts in evidence. Bussinesses dont base their prices on what it cost them to make something but on WHAT THEY CAN GET. If they make a widget for 25 cents and can get a thousand dollars for it THAT is what they will charge. Your argument if taken to its logical conclusion would mean we could NEVER TAX ANY BUSSINESS AT ANY TIME. It doesnt work that way. Bussinesses pay taxes on their PROFITS.
              Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (March 23, 2008 5:34 am ET)
             

          Did whites EARN the front seats on the transit bus? 

          Did whites EARN the more desirable seats at the movie theater?

          Did whites EARN their own lunch counters, drinking fountains and restrooms?

          Did whites EARN the right to deny loans, housing and employment to non-whites simply because they are non-white?

          Do you blame the big mean government for taking away these "hard-earned" assets of white America?

           

          Report Abuse
        • Author by Kevino (March 23, 2008 9:34 am ET)
             
          you mean like, "Give unto caesar" or something like that?

          Taxes are the price of admission to our society.

          Freedom isn't free! End the bush tax cuts!
          Report Abuse
          • Author by ben (March 23, 2008 12:46 pm ET)
               

            Actually taxes are more the cost of the benefit you receive from that society. If there is no benefit there should be no cost. There are "externalities" to use a business term and some are good and some are bad. Having people paid a living wage lowers crime, there is a benefit that one receives when crime is lower and that is paid for through taxes (which can then be used to maintain the living wage).

            At least that is how I think the argument should be framed.  

            Report Abuse
    • Author by npolimeni (March 23, 2008 1:31 am ET)
         
      Typical agitator, with Limbo syndrome:  misses the point, evades the key issue, to "discourse towards reconciliation," blames, dismisses, assumes a position of understood superiority, like "nobody has helped the blacks like the whites have," as if some humans have a superior right to lands and places above others. Stands on unspoken, assumed subtly declared rightness from which he spews meaningless platitudes. Fails to define a single grievance clearly; stirs people to anger, and leaves an issues further away from resolution then before he started talking. Incites to disputes, and revenge; attempts to harden positions which are no longer untenable. This type of person will not hesitate to distort the facts to ingrain divisiveness.  

      Does this man's discourse move us towards solutions and social resolutions, or do we feel the gap widening and the desperation increase? Obviously the latter. So why spend time reading and following people of this ilk?

      Now two things are possible, he's being paid to keep populations divided and constantly distracted and fighting, or he's simply too dense to grasp the real aspirations of humans. The latter is less believable, since it requires intentionally distorted intent to sound so rational, like the 3rd Reich Minister of Propaganda.

      I've been following this prototype and until now I've been failing to name it or describe it. But I think it's beginning to sink in. These folks are neither democrats, republican, religious, nor do they hold any real principles, but are parasites of ideologies which they can exploit to maintain divisiveness.

      It's time we begin to recognize them and start ignoring them...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ExPatBerliner (March 23, 2008 5:23 am ET)
         
      Should we be grateful for the rate of incarceration among blacks too?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by renata856 (March 23, 2008 10:23 am ET)
         
      Of course, the basis of Mr. Buchanan's premise is that ONLY white people have created VALUE and/or been part of the amazingly successful American experiment since the Nation's birth. The grindingly hard work and INVESTMENT by African-Americans who did not seek to come here or generationally get to BENEFIT by their INVESTMENT is something they and their decendants should be GRATEFUL for. Contributions by African-Americans, for the most part GRATIS, gets to be devalued as (payment) for GRATITUDE that should be felt. ONLY Mr. Buchanan and white people get to decide the currency exchange and, at the end of centuries, the equation Mr. Buchanan and Conservatives/Republicans have arrived at is African-Americans should be GRATEFUL and dismiss or counter with another perspective regarding what is due -- and to whom. Question: Would Mr. Buchanan, Republicans/Conservatives put such a low VALUE on their own contributions? Would they STILL love a Nation that ground their ancestors into dehumanizing, un-compensated work -- and disassociation from the very Nation/culture he found himself in? Would he be GRATEFUL?  I still say, and it seems even some reporters at Fox have some limits as of last week, anyway -- put these Neanderthals front and center -- in the Nixonian light of day, where they can be SEEN and embraced (or not) for what they are. MSNBC and media outlets should be held accountable for these kinds of race-baiting comments in the public discourse on OUR airwaves. Yes, WE OWN THEM!  Mr. Buchanan has commoditized this genre for more than a quarter of a century. African-Americans, American Indians and other brown people should NOT have to subsidize this kind of baseless, historically WRONG public discourse. Turn the page.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by renata856 (March 23, 2008 10:32 am ET)
        1
      And, yes...perhaps the greater PATRIOTISM is loving, investing in and working toward CHANGE w/out being respected/loved in return...and courageously raising one's children to try to generationally EARN what others simply by the color of their skin -- like Patrick Buchanan -- get at birth.  Let's have a REAL discussion about what PATRIOTISM really is...besides wearing pins, saying "SO" like Dick Cheney when told the overwhelming MAJORITY of Americans want the War to end, avoiding the DRAFT as Bill Clinton/Dick Cheney/George W. Bush  -- and Patrick Buchanan and most of the Neo-Conservatives -- ALL did -- curiously. YES, let's have THAT discussion.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by renata856 (March 23, 2008 11:09 am ET)
        1
      How unfortunate for Pat Buchanan (and the ranting Ruch Limbaugh and Fox News -- or the "So" Dick Cheney) that their era of dictating and controling everyone else via pitting us against one another is coming to an END. How unfortunate they can't tell us WHO we are, WHAT we are, WHO we should like or not, DEFINE our reality/values, etc. How unfortunate THEY don't get immediate validation and preference simply by being WHO they are -- in the 21st Century. Poor little things....  "So!"
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jrrrr (March 23, 2008 2:04 pm ET)
        1

      Well, at least the Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, didn't say  "I can no more turn my back on Pat Buchanan, than I can the white community."   Obama let the world see his commitment to black unity, when he  said this very thing about his profoundly racist Reverend Wright and the black community, proving that he isn't smart enough to figure out just why black unity is as counterproductive to social harmony, as white unity.

      Obama falsely claims skin color irrelevancy out of one side of his two faces,  then ALSO claims  these irrelevant color differences must guide American political policy in the redistribution of resources, from white to black...he can't have it both ways and still look like anything but a racist hypocrite. Especially since there are MORE poor whites in America than poor blacks. 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by apapazukamori (March 24, 2008 12:38 pm ET)
          1
        Did you miss the part about his grandmother?  Tell me you didn't miss that part.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by m_richert7383 (March 23, 2008 3:48 pm ET)
        1
      Why oh why does the media keep hauling Buchanan out and getting opinions from him? He is a political dinosaur. He was a speechwriter for Nixon and he never understood what all the fuss was about concerning Watergate. He is stuck in his time and in his prejudices and he is absolutely predictable. Isn't it time to move on?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by koukaldr8156 (March 23, 2008 6:46 pm ET)
        1

      Wow . . . talk about suppressed evidence!

      Just "brought over on slave ships."  Who was driving?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by EinDallas (March 23, 2008 6:55 pm ET)
        1
      Has Buchanan ever asked himself whether these "grateful" African Americans ASKED to be brought to this country they owe so much to?  Of course not.  Has he ever asked himself under what conditions they were brought here?  Of course not.  Every single program he referenced is a "welfare" program directed to the "lower class" i.e. African- American.  What a pompous cyst on the American politic he is.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by heru (March 23, 2008 7:33 pm ET)
        1

      Oh thank you White Man for enslaving generations of my ancestors, for colonizing my entire Motherland, for annihilating my race, for segregation, for apartheid, for stealing our resources, for racism, discrimination, lynching......

       OH LAWD IT WAS WORTH IT ALL FOR INTRODUCING US TO YOUR WHITE JESUS WHO MAY NOT HAVE SAVED US FFROM ANY OF THE ABOVE, HE DID SAVE US FROM THE WHITE WOMAN YOU SAID WAS EVIL FOR EATING FROM THE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE IN THE GARDEN OF EDEN FAIRY TALE...

      OH LAWDIE OH LAWD THANK YOU MR. WHITE MAN I AM POSSESSED BY THE SPIRIT OF SHELBY STEELE AND CLARENCE THOMAS...CAN I HAVE A JOB BETRAYING MY RACE TOO?

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by ben (March 23, 2008 9:38 pm ET)
          1
        I would say "You are welcome" but I didn't do any of those things. ;)
        Report Abuse
    • Author by saxmartyrs (March 24, 2008 5:14 am ET)
        1
      Unless I skipped over it in my haste to reply to this BS from PatBuch and his apologists/sycophants, I just felt the need to point out that statistically, white women have been the chief beneficiaries of welfare AND affirmative action. This in no way is aimed at Hilary, but facts need to be included when de-bunking scapegoat-ism. And the point is taken by the earlier poster who pointed out that from their very inception, these programs have been under fire to the point of budgeted funds failing to be actually allocated.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by saxmartyrs (March 24, 2008 5:16 am ET)
        1
      Oh, and as far as gratitude is concerned..........THWACK!!!! "Thank you sir, may I have another?"
      Report Abuse
    • Author by jinxer (March 24, 2008 10:32 am ET)
        1

      Mas'sah Buchanan,

      I spit(big green luggie) into the hand you extend related to some sort of gratitude you expect black folk to give white people for what has been done over the last 400 years...I'm not asking for your acceptance & certainly don't want you thinking Obama should be tap dancing his way into the White House with a chicken eating grin just so you can sleep at night having had the final word on this subject....

      ....wake up, Mr Buchanan, the times are achangin'  

       

      Report Abuse
    • Author by anotheramerican (March 24, 2008 11:27 am ET)
        1

      Nobody here engaged in slave trade or slave ownership. Nobody here brought blacks over from Africa.  Millions of Americans didn't arrive on these shores until well after the Civil War.  To blame any white-Americans today for the sins racism in the past does not make sense.  

      None of us can go back and change our history. We all know what happened in the past. We all acknowledge that racism is terrible. Rather than make up silly responses to Buchanan, lets discuss the problems of today. Lets figure out what we can do today to eliminate the last vestiges of racism and make the American dream accessible to all. 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 4:18 pm ET)
          1

        Rather than make up silly responses to Buchanan, lets discuss the problems of today. Lets figure out what we can do today to eliminate the last vestiges of racism and make the American dream accessible to all

        You could start by getting a giant cork and some Gorilla Glue.

        1. Smear gorilla glue all over the sides of the cork.

        2. Shoce the glue-smeared cork into Pat Buchannan's mouth.

        3. Hold in place until the glue sets.

        4. Go find more corks for Michael savage, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, et.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by wzwriter (March 24, 2008 3:48 pm ET)
         

      Adolf Buchannan is looking back to a simpler time, when blacks would bow to white men and say "Thankyou Massa - thankyou Massa" for the least little scrap tossed their way.

      People like him are still angry that the Civil Rights Movement took place....

      Report Abuse
    • Author by ladyday59 (March 24, 2008 6:42 pm ET)
        1

      Ah sho is sorry, Massa Buchanan.  Dis darkie most likely be sittin' in a mud hut, wearin' a bone in my nose, 'cept for da good white folks lak you, what brung my peoples here.  Please don't whup me. I sho thanks you.

      Is that what you're looking for, Pat?

      I don't have time to point out all the factual incaccuracies of Grand Dragon Buchanan's essay. The really sad thing is that this ignorant, racist blowhole is given a veneer of respectability by the "news organizations" that continue to employ him as a political consultant. Shame on MSNBC for expecting talented, intelligent people to share studio space and air time with him

      Report Abuse
    • Author by pmarquie9090 (March 24, 2008 8:05 pm ET)
        1

      What does a hatemonger like Buchanan hold most dear?  AMERICA!!  I challenge one of the many multi-millionaire BLACK Americans to use their blessings to gain access to government military service records of blacks and shut this down!  Broadcast this information repeatedly in white states.  CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC, CBS…Blacks have traditionally served this country with zero gratitude.  No medals (posthumous after in many cases, ½ a century).  No recognition (Tuskgee Airmen who defended bomber runs during WWII and lost NONE!).  While many whites were running around lynching blacks during WWII, here are some the units that blacks were fighting in overseas to return home to a noose! 

      41st Engineers
      31st, 47th and 48th Quartermaster Regiments
      76th and 77th Coast Artillery
      341st Field Artillery Regiment - 1919-1941
      Field Artillery School Detachment
      Army War College Detachment
      Engineering School Detachment
      Medical Detachment, USMA
      Medical Detachment, Fort Huachuca
      510th Military Police
      730th Military Police
      320th Anti-Aircraft Barrage Balloon Battalion
      275th Signal Construction Company

      Take it a step further; the numbers, data and research shows that all of the flashpoint rhetoric used against blacks can be easily confronted and defeated with evidence to the contrary.  This evidence is a matter of public record in halls of “justice” and government archiving facilities.

       I’m not suggesting that blacks go on the defensive responding to every racist charge with inordinate amounts of data; however, in a political climate where your white neighbor more apt to believe the first bad thing they hear about you, it is in your best interest to make positive data about you available (pumped in their faces on a daily basis) until it becomes dangerous (economically, politically and socially) for ANYONE to think that blacks are fair game for hate!

      Don’t become a victim of revised Apartheid system in a country you built for FREE!

      Stop having white people say “he is so eloquent”, “he is a great speaker”.  These are all demeaning terms that are translated differently in the homes of those that want to set the clock back 100 years!

      Advertise yourselves and stop letting the racist (tacitly or otherwise) establishment build negative images of you in the minds of the world’s people!  As a result of American racism, EVERY country around the world thinks that Blacks are the worst people and should be avoided and therefore no pity or humanity should be extended.

      As for the gratitude, where is the gratitude for Slavery!? 

      Don’t let whites get away with this notion that you should be thanking them for Jim Crowe Laws, Lynchings, Slavery, Police brutality, Segregation, Racism, raping your women, murdering your fore fathers, murdering your babies so they won’t grow up, Prejudice and a host of maltreatment by whites.

      As for being grateful, when someone sh** on your head you don’t thank him for the hat!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by keaauwahine6339 (March 24, 2008 10:22 pm ET)
        1
      I hope I never have to see his smug face on tv again. He should be ashamed.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eyerah (March 25, 2008 11:33 am ET)
        1
      it's funny how pat buchanon emplores us to talk about the good things whites have done to blacks, but he won't give that same courtesy to rev wright and talk about all the good things he's done in the community. he won't even listen to an entire wrights sermon, so what a hypocrite. also, the good things whites have done "for blacks" actually have all benefitted white women and poor white families more than blacks, so he should get his facts straight. 40 years of "civil rights" that were already owed to us by the constitution don't trump 400 years of slavery and oppression. i guess we should be appreciative for being "brought from Africa on slave ships" (notice he didn't mention being brutally enslaved for hundreds of years), blessed with the good book, which it was illegal for us to learn to read on our own, robbed of our cultures and religions, and "given" freedom and prosperity, even though we had it in Africa centuries ago before the continent was imperialized and raped of its resources. i'd be happy to give pat a real history lesson, if that's what he wants.
      Report Abuse