Triumph of the Bigoted, Intolerant Left: Buchanan Fired

Robert Prey said:
crimresearch said:
You contradict yourself.

You claimed that Buchanan was fired, and then you ran away when asked for evidence that he didn't just quit when the people running their own business wouldn't let him use their (very expensive) air time to publicize his book that would be guaranteed to chase away their customers.

You simply made up the claim that no one said anything about the 1st Amendment, and then you ran away when Buchanan was directly quoted from your link, saying exactly that.

You regularly cited Scripture as a moral authority, and when it was pointed out that you violated it by breaking the commandment to not bear false witness, you ran away.

You continued to post the fabrication that those who are opposed to bigotry and racism are themselves the intolerant ones, not the bigots, and when that was debunked, you ran... do I need to go on to 50?
Click to expand...
Baloney.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's all that's needed to disprove that. :rolleyes:
 
Robert Prey said:
I don't think a posting of the 10 Commandments would hurt anybody. A lot of people in this day and age never even heard of them. But there are Constitutional reasons why such would be prohibited -- a negative consequence to living in a multi-cultural society.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I don't think there is very much that I can contribute to this thread, so I will bow out.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
I can't be quite as positive about the current state of our society.

Not when books by people like Buchanan still have a large supportive audience, and there is still a Birther movement, and not when Gingrich refers to Obama as "the food stamp president" during a nationally televised debate (and his campaign added that sound bite to a TV ad). Not when we've got absurd anti-immigration movements (passing state laws based on the lie that the federal government doesn't enforce immigration laws despite the fact that federal enforcement is at all-time historic record high levels).

We've come a long way, but I don't think we can yet consider bigotry to be a thing of the past in America.
Click to expand...

Not when the government itself condones a Congressional Black Caucus.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Try this, Robert Prey:

Even if we believe (contrary to fact) that Buchanan was fired, the motivation for that fictional firing was the belief that he is spewing racist views that would turn away the TV station's audience. Even if you in your idiosyncratic world-view think Buchanan isn't racist, wouldn't you at least admit that the TV station honestly does believe that Buchanan was going to promote a book full of racist views?

That is, your attributing the fictional firing to bigotry and intolerance is wrong, even if you are correct (and you're not) in saying that Buchanan is not racist.

What is your evidence for bigotry and intolerance as the motivation for this fictional firing? Have older white males been underrepresented on the TV news? Or is this just some kind of unexpressed, potential bigotry and intolerance?
Click to expand...

Still asking for a single quote from the book (which you have not read) that is "racist."
 
Robert Prey said:
Still asking for a single quote from the book (which you have not read) that is "racist."
Click to expand...

You didn't ask for a quote from the book, you asked...
Robert Prey said:
Point of clarification: Buchanan? Racism? How so?
Click to expand...

But at any rate quotes from the book and from other sources were provided and you (rather pathetically) tried to hand waive them away.

So that leaves the question, what would you consider a racist quote?
 
Redtail said:
You didn't ask for a quote from the book, you asked...


But at any rate quotes from the book and from other sources were provided and you (rather pathetically) tried to hand waive them away.

So that leaves the question, what would you consider a racist quote?
Click to expand...

NO. It is you and your Amen Chorus of race baiters who have not even read the book. Still asking for just one example. That should not be difficult, unless you have zero real examples.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Robert Prey
Not when the government itself condones a Congressional Black Caucus.

Moss wrote:
"What has that to do with Buchanan again? Why do you insist on changing the topic instead of actually discussing it?"

Comment:
It has everything to do with the race baiting hypocrisy of the Left. And still, no one has been able to cite one single example of a racist quote from Bucanan's book which got him blacklisted, but no one on this board has even read.
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
Originally Posted by Robert Prey
Not when the government itself condones a Congressional Black Caucus.

Moss wrote:
"What has that to do with Buchanan again? Why do you insist on changing the topic instead of actually discussing it?"

Comment:
It has everything to do with the race baiting hypocrisy of the Left. And still, no one has been able to cite one single example of a racist quote from Bucanan's book which got him blacklisted, but no one on this board has even read.
Click to expand...


Where is your evidence that "The Left" is doing "race baiting"? How do you define race baiting in the first place? Who exactly is "The Left"?
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
If you want a dialogue, one point at a time, please. Have you even read the book? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Then ******* pick one of his points!

People here have presented loads and loads of evidence for their claims, and you reply with inane drivel like "In your heart, you know he´s right" or demand they jump through flaming hoops in the vain hope that this will magically make you stop handwaving away all the evidence that your fanaticism demands you must not acknowledge.

Well, I´ve got news for you: this is a skeptics´ forum. Here, when you make claims, you present evidence for them. Here, when someone presents evidence, you deal with it. You don´t get to set up new demented rules that other must conform to in order for you to deign acknowledge the existence of their replies.
 
Robert Prey said:
If you want a dialogue, one point at a time, please.
Click to expand...
Non-issue. You're stalling. You could have addressed all eight for all the time and energy you've spent complaining that I've given you too much evidence of Buchanan's racism.

Honestly, my three year old is less stubborn...


Robert Prey said:
Have you even read the book? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Does it matter? Are the quotes inaccurate? If so, how?
 
Robert Prey said:
NO. It is you and your Amen Chorus of race baiters who have not even read the book. Still asking for just one example. That should not be difficult, unless you have zero real examples.
Click to expand...

Examples have been provided, you insist they are not racist. So, what would you consider a racist quote?
 
Robert Prey said:
And still, no one has been able to cite one single example of a racist quote from Bucanan's book which got him blacklisted, but no one on this board has even read.
Click to expand...

Other ...er, "mistruths" aside, who said anything about Buchanan being blacklisted? Do you understand what that term means?
 
Robert Prey said:
Still asking for a single quote from the book (which you have not read) that is "racist."
Click to expand...

You failed to read what I posted.

I was, for the sake of argument alone, ceding the point as to whether or not Buchanan is racist. Let's assume you're correct and he is not. The fact is, though, that there is no evidence that he was fired because of bigotry or intolerance on the left. (For now, we can even ignore the fact that he wasn't actually fired too.)

You have provided no evidence that your claim is so. In fact, his employers refused to let him promote his book on their channel because they believed it was racist (or they simply believed the views it expressed were so extreme that it would turn away viewers and hurt them financially).

It is not my burden to prove that what they think is correct (though that has been done amply in this thread). It is your burden to prove that your claim is correct, and you have failed utterly to do so.

Your claim is false on several accounts. First, it's false that he was fired. Second, it's at least unsubstantiated that this fictional firing (we can switch "fired" to "denied permission to promote his book" to advance the discussion) was due to bigotry or intolerance of the left.

So again, will you not retract the factually false claim that he was fired?

Let's substitute "denied permission to promote his book on their programming" for "fired". What is your evidence that this decision was the result of bigotry and intolerance and not as claimed (fear that promoting the book would actually cost the station)?

I will be happy to have a separate discussion on the question of whether or not Buchanan is racist. That has already been well proven on this thread, but it's not really relevant or necessary to establish in order to debunk the claim you're asserting in this thread.

Do you really think the First Amendment prohibits the station from acting in its own financial best interest by denying him permission to promote his book?
 
Robert Prey said:
If you want a dialogue, one point at a time, please.
Click to expand...
Why?

Have you even read the book? I don't think so.
Click to expand...
Not necessary. Your claim is that he was denied permission to promote the book on the air (actually that he was fired) because of bigotry and intolerance. You have provided no evidence to substantiate that claim.

The station believed that promoting the book on the air would harm them.

Do you think this financial self interest is the same thing as bigotry and intolerance? If so, what is your evidence?

Isn't is possible that the station was actually exercising its right to protect itself from financial harm? (Or do you deny that it has that right? Is it anything but racist and bigotry if the station doesn't act as if Buchanan is the station owner?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom