Can anyone explain to me we why Hearst is being pressured to fire Thomas, while Buchanan is comfy...

[wndycty]

. . .at MSNBC.

I will not defend her comments but we need some perspective here and it doesn't sit well with me that she is so close to being fired, yet Pat Buchanan can spew his shit without fear of repercussions.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Excellent point

:thumbsup:

[Angry Dragon]

2. Because old pattie is god's voice

so he can not say anything wrong

[elleng]

3. Same old Same old

and buchanan is 'known for' being 'contrary.'

[scheming daemons]

4. Because one gets paid to provide opinions, and the other gets paid to be a reporter

If Helen Thomas were being paid to give her opinions, things would be different.



She's a reporter. She's supposed to at least feign impartiality. She's not an OpEd writer.

Pat Buchanan is paid for expressing his opinions, however pathetic they are.



It's amazing that more people don't understand the difference.

[Journeyman]

6. But Helen Thomas writes opinion pieces all the time. . .

http://www.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/10/25/thomas.lessons.obama/index.html

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/helenthomas/index.html (multiple pieces at this link)

and many more, too numerous to provide links to even a fraction. . .

[Enthusiast]

22. Exactly. nt

[Bobbieo]

8. Sad, but true!!!

[sandnsea]

11. Not anymore, she now has a column

Has had for several years. And she didn't even write her opinions in her column the way Buchanan and the others do.

[Wickerman]

18. -1

She was asked her opinion outside of the White House. She gave it. It wasn't for scheduled broadcast. Pat says his patently racist shit over the airwaves day in and out.

It's amazing you don't understand the difference.

[midnight]

5. I'm absolutely curious myself. Helen has Ari Fleischer's selective concern rearing

itself this week, and accusing her of religious cleansing. "The way the press treats athletes and sports executives has become increasingly adversarial and conflict-driven. Athletes who are trained to give it all and leave it on the field now face a public and a media that demand more. On the other hand, players and executives who get it often find their careers are launched to higher, more successful, lucrative levels — thanks to the good publicity they receive.Ari Fleischer Sports Communications can help you handle the bad news and take advantage of the good. " http://www.fleischersports.com/home.php May be he is trying to drum up new business.

Then we had Lanny Davis scream foul over anti-Semitic accusations.
Davis is known for, among other things, leading the attack on Barack Obama for his association with Reverend Jeremiah Wright. "Why didn't he speak up earlier?" Davis asked in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, demanding to know why the candidate didn't distance himself from Wright's remarks. Recently, Davis has been hired by corporations to derail the labor-backed Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it easier for unions to organize, all the while touting himself as a "pro-labor liberal."http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-grandin/fact-checking-lanny-davis_b_255900.html
Who know's what Lanny is up to....

[backscatter712]

7. IOKIYAR...

Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan and their ilk can be as vile as they want, and they only consequences they'll see is the occasional wagged finger.

If a liberal dares to say something stupid, ruined career on the first offense.

I can't believe some DUers are helping out with this witchhunt... Yes, she said something stupid. Yes, she apologized. So get over it.

[City Lights]

13. !

:thumbsup:

[Enthusiast]

23. +1, with you all the way!

The huge unacknowledged double standard.

[Ozymanithrax]

9. I don't think Buchanan should be paid to "opinionate" either... n/t

[sandnsea]

10. Good question

I read the entirety of her comments and there isn't a thing wrong with them. It's her opinion, that's all. Buchanan's crap is ten times worse.

[HughMoran]

12. Buchanan cut his political/journalistic teeth as a racist

If you've never denied being an idiot, there's no problem.

Besides, we expect right-wingers to be racists - it's difficult to find a right-winger who's not a racist. I've never met a Republican who didn't let their racists views be known behind closed doors. The Party of Racist - GOP.

[OHdem10]

14. You do not mess with Republicans.

[Mojeoux]

15. "Lawyers Guns and Money!"

"get me out of this."

[iamjoy]

16. It's Outrageous, Isn't It?

I think what she said was horrible, but I don't think she should be fired and I won't threaten a "boycott."

That's the beauty of freedom. She can make a comment I consider stupid, cruel and anti-Semitic. Oh, and her apology...not accepted. I choose not to read her columns, articles, etc. I see no need to be a bully about it, though. Other people like her and are welcome to her. Maybe some agree with her, or think she spoke from anger and doesn't really mean what she said.

Freedom of expression means sometimes we're going to be offended and angry when people who disagree with us exercise those rights.

[Tumbulu]

17. Good point!

Yes, being a wrong winger gives one the license to be mean vociferously in public and private. And then to celebrate it.

[Walk away]

19. Because she is a reporter and he is a pundit.

I love her but she knows she screwed up. A crappy station like Fox doesn't care about the integrity of their reporters but when you work for real news you can't say things like that. I have spent lots of time with reporters and they don't ever talk about their politics in public. If she wants to write editorials or be a guest on MSNBC she can but the organization she works for is not entertainment, it's news.

[G_j]

20. agreed, good point.

And it's almost like they retain Buchanan because he says those things.
He's the resident Bigot.

[suffragette]

21. I think it's because they view it as payback time

Many of those yelling loudest, like Fleischer, thought they had the perception game won completely in the media for awhile. They had a largely compliant or complicit group in the White House press corps. Remember Gannon being in the room? And they'd even staffed places like the NY Times with colleagues like Judith "Aspen" Miller.

They'd shoved Thomas to the back of the room, but she kept speaking up and pressing them and keeping us all informed.
And they hated that.

Colbert probably captured nightmares they had with the piece he included of Helen in his video at the press dinner.

Helen didn't give up, she didn't back down and she gave them no place to attack.
Now they see an opening and they're on the attack and will press as hard as they can to have her fired.

[Enthusiast]

24. +1, nt

[political_Dem]

25. The Old Boys Club.

They never let one of their own down--even if he continues to make the most racially inflammatory comments on the air. It is horrifying that year after year this man is given a pass for spreading hate in the media. But as long as their target audience "doesn't see it" nothing will be done about it. I doubt the target audience would care if MSNBC hired David Duke to help Old Pat do some more "color commentary" on their political shows.

:eyes:

[crikkett]

26. it's because the people pressuring Hearst think they may prevail. n/t

[WeDidIt]

27. Because Repukes saw how easily they coudl shut up Dan Rather with their high and mighty bullshit

and they see an opportunity to take out another liberal voice.

[wndycty]

28. Someone needs to call them on their hypocrisy

:kick:

[Raineyb]

29. No one has ever lost money for long bashing black and brown people.

Apparently some people's existence, rights, and dignity, are more sacrosanct than others.

[Kablooie]

30. He's Republican. Simple as that.

For Republicans, racism is de rigeur.

[Greyhound]

31. Because we live under a corporatocracy. n/t

[JoeyT]

32. Because it has nothing to do with Jewish people.

Buchanan hates Jewish people, but he hates Muslims more, so he's pro-Israel. So that's ok.
The pro-Israel group doesn't really care if someone hates Jewish people or not. The kneejerk "OMFG You hate Jews! Racist! Anti-Semite!" fired at anyone that doesn't support Israel 100% of the time is just a useful phrase. They know it's nonsense most of the time.

[LeftishBrit]

33. Buchanan isn't pro-Israel either.

He has all the typical xenophobic-isolationist hatred toward Israel, and tendency to blame it for everything America does. (The ironic thing is that he and Avigdor Lieberman would detest each other, and yet have so much in common!)

He is also VILE about immigrants in Europe, and prepared to support far-right groups and leaders here. The first time I came across him was through his defence of LePen in 2002.

He is certainly a racist and anti-semite, as well as a sexist, homophobe, immigrant-hater, and all round detestable bigot!