How Rachel Maddow's rebut of Pat Buchanan missed the mark

[WileEcoyote]

My guess is that there is only so far Maddow can go on MSNBC. I love her and am very very glad for what she does but her rebuttal of Pat Buchanan missed the mark.

"Uncle Pat" (a crazy uncle for sure) can always be expected to rile up right wing Amerikans in order for him to take the limelight. And his insistence that the GOP should exist primarily to protect White males is, well crazy. I say let the GOP have him.

However Maddow missed the boat in last week's debate with Buchanan. Instead of debating Affirmative Action vs. angry white men what she should have said is that MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS ARE TO BLAME FOR POOR WAGES, OUTSOURCING AND INSTITUTIONALIZED POVERTY. These bandits are the problem, not us poor, dumb white men. So I think anyway.

In a more humane, unionized labor world we really wouldn't need Affirmative Action at all. In the meantime the concept is a lightning rod to activate discontent. A good wedge issue for both sides and one that serves the corporate robber barons very well.

I say it's a false issue and Maddow probably knows this. She's a lot smarter than me anyhow and must have figured this out on her own. Or she should have. Or MSNBC probably isn't allowing her to effectively discuss the matter.

[BlooInBloo]

1. (facepalm)

[Walk away]

2. She was replying to statements he made about white males...

their discussion was about reverse discrimination not "who is to blame for poor wages?".

She is apparently smart enough to rebut the actual argument he made.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. I was thinking

that she could have better used the time to wish my aunt a speedy recovery, or maybe commend that marching band on its appearance in the July 4 parade.

Or else she could have given us a song? A dance?

Now, THOSE would have been real issues, as opposed to the giant aardvark lurking outside the front door, just waiting to gobble up the cat next time he pops through that special door.

Unless, of course, the special door is just another way for those MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS are able to spy on us.

The thought has occurred to me.

Now, I'm going to put some clothes on.

Thwarting the MULTI-NATIONAL CORPORATIONS is my life......................

[burning rain]

4. I think it was right on the mark.

If, however, you observe in a general way that American Democrats and liberals, and most of the media, tend to be weak or worse on liberal economic issues, and only reliable on social issues, which don't cost money (not a coincidence -- the social-liberal / fiscal-conservative philosophy is based on self-congratulation, desire for prestige, and interest in appearing as an enlightened liberal while being a greedhead), then you'll be right. Maddow, however, is not guilty there; she cares about liberal economic issues. And you'd be right to observe that a party that leaves liberal economic issues unadressed is not coherently liberal. But Buchanan's obviously racist diatribe required a specific reponse.