Reader comments · Pat Buchanan: ‘Militant gays’ try to take me off air · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Pat Buchanan: ‘Militant gays’ try to take me off air

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Pat Buchanan is a rabid, bigotted moron (no offence to people with rabies).

    I’d like to point out here that most people in the UK will never have seen this guy on TV.

    I’d like to suggest to Pink News to make a greater effort to be mindful of the fact that while US gay websites are fullof interesting stories, that these stories are largely irrelevant to most of the Pink News readership who do not live in the US.

    1. Meh, I’m an Aussie. Bring on the big global picture. Is there a Pink World?

      1. True.

        But there is a serious over-reliance in Pink News on US news stories which really have no relevance to anyone outside the US. It’s like they are simply trying to fill space – like that useless story the other day about some US reality TV star who was going to burn her underwear for marriage equality in New Jersey.

        1. There isn’t loads to right about in current UK/ other countries going on at the minute where as the fight for equality in the US is in full swing so its understandable most of the stories are US based.

    2. dAVID, are you saying we shouldn’t worry about extremist views in other countries? That’s a bit of a blinkered view, surely? At risk of being accused of that paradox or whatever it is, I could point out that not paying attention to what the German propoganda machine was saying in the 1930s was a mistake for many people. This guy is a racist, homophobe, I betr he thinks women should be chained to the kitchen, too, lest UnAmerican values prevail, but as long as there are idiots buying his rotten book, he needs watching.

      1. OK fine. I take your point.

        But I think the LGBT community in the US is more than capable of dealing with their home grown maniac, without our help.

        And there is still the question of relevance.

        I know it is very easy simply to read US gay websites and reprint these US based stories.

        This luinatic’s opinions bear no relevance to the everyday lives of the majority of this website’s readership.

        If Pink News is going to report on Pat Buchanan today,

        1. David Myers 12 Jan 2012, 11:07pm

          When will you learn that human rights (GLBTQ or others) are important and relevant through out the world. An attack on human rights anywhere is an attack on all of our human rights. Wake Up!

    3. But many of us are interested in what goes on in US and other parts of the world, if you personally have no interest in gay related news items from elsewhere then you don’t need to read them in depth, just move on to another story why don’t you?.

      1. I am interested in US news. And I go to US news sites to read the stories.

        Most of the Pink News stories relating to the US are next day reprints of stories from Towleroad or Queerty or The Advocate.

        The stories look stale and out of place. If international news stories are required then there are 178 countries other than the US from which to source them.

        1. Quite often I read about UK LGBT news on the guardian a few day or two before Pink News covers it. It doesn’t make me think PN is stale and out of date it just makes me think they don’t have the budget and resources of other media outlets

      2. I totally agree Pavlos. I am totally interested in reading about
        Gay issues from all countries including USA and issues from quite a few countries are featured on Pink News. Yes I can CHOOSE to read them or not…or read them on other sites…but I don’t. I like to read them on Pink News. Sometimes the criticism here seems more like an anti Pink News Rant then anything constructive. If you don’t like Pink News…then use one of the other sites that report on stories that are more interesting to you. Its not rocket science.

      3. @Pavlos

        I am interested in a gay perspective on stories worldwide (including the US) …

        I also seek other views on news stories – Guardian, Independent, LA Times, New Zealand Herald, Jerusalem Post are just some of the other sources I use to understand what is happening in the world … but PN also adds to my evaluation and reaching views …

        Buchanan is vile. Freedom of speech is important, I agree – but that should not mean that a platform should automatically be given to someone with bigotry and hatred.

        1. M Schwartz 13 Jan 2012, 1:16am

          Then you don’t really believe in freedom of speech, maybe you’d prefer China or the old USSR?

          1. No, I entirely agree with freedom of speech …

            I recognise that the exercising of freedom requires people to understand the responsibilities this places upon them … freedoms carry responsibilities …

            Those who seek to abuse freedoms tend to conveniently forget the responsibilities that they have …

            It is those who fail to engage with their responsibilities that threaten freedom of speech – not those that seek to prevent hateful and damaging rhetoric … In other words it is people like Buchanan that risk restriction of freedoms due to lacking any responsibility or morality, not civil rights movements who seek to prevent hatred …

    4. I live in North America. Pink News is the main gay news site I visit, since Viacom shut down 365gay, and The Advocate is at times far too seedy to take seriously. North American gay people read Pink News more than you may think.

    5. M Schwartz 13 Jan 2012, 1:14am

      Buchanan is an intelligent and brave commentator. The West needs more people willing to challenge sacred cows of unlimited immigration, and the idea that demographic changes in the US (or Europe for that matter) are necessarily a good thing.

      1. “demographic changes” – is that code for a mantra of white supremacy?

  2. Jock S. Trap 12 Jan 2012, 11:46am

    Wow, paranoid much Pat?

    Don’t those kinds of comments usually begin with “I’m not Racist but…” Or “I’m not Homophobic but…”?

    What an ass this man is, clearly thinks he’s in need of media attention because he clearly shows batant disrespect for people and who they are.

    1. He didn’t even bother to cover up his prejudice, something I kind of respect this “I’m not homophobic but” lines really piss me off, yes you are homophobic and you might aswell say it because we all know it anyway.

  3. “Buchanan, referring to himself in the third person”

    That’s always a sign of a narcissistic personality.

    1. David Myers 12 Jan 2012, 11:21pm

      You are so right Pavlos. Buchanan is a hate monger who, had he lived in the “30’s” in Germany would have fited right in with the hate mongers of that period (you know who you were/are!).

      1. M Schwartz 13 Jan 2012, 1:07am

        Wrong. Buchanan is simply someone who manages to point out some inconvenient realities that others tune out.

        1. What a load of bollocks!

        2. No, he’s a sad, paranoid old man, M Schwartz.

        3. Jock S. Trap 13 Jan 2012, 11:57am

          You wouldn’t know reality even if a mosquito bite your arse with the word reality in capital letters!

        4. @M Schwartz

          Are these the inconvenient “truths” that all people are not equal and never should be and that white, right wing, male, heterosexual, extremist Christians should be the recipient of most benefits and rights of others should be oppressed?

          Thats the sort of “truth” Buchanan perpetuates …

          To answer Buchanan’s question in his book “Will America survive to 2025?” – almost certainly yes … However, there are signs that it will be less small minded, more embracing of difference and less egotistical (at least in the minds of many of its citizens) than the brash, ignorant, racist and homophobic attitude of Buchanan and his supporters.

  4. US political commentator? Please describe him for what he is. He is not a political commentator. He is an overzealous religious crank.

    1. Unfortunately, far too often, “conservative” politicial commentators are overzealous religious cranks. You should hear half the things Ann Coulter gets away with.

  5. Spanner1960 12 Jan 2012, 12:29pm

    “Black and white lived apart, went to different schools and churches, played on different playgrounds, and went to different restaurants, bars, theaters, and soda fountains. But we shared a country and a culture. We were one nation. We were Americans.”

    Nothing’s changed there then, it’s still the same in most countries, that’s why you end up with ghettoes.

    1. Well, I don’t know where you live Spanner but my experience of the communities that I have lives in for the past 20 years are much more ethnically diverse and mixed (usually reasonably well integrated) compared to the clear situation where I grew up where it was 99.99% white and any non-whites were obvious and seen as “different”. Some of the perceptions whilst racist were not out of malice but out of ignorance. Largely, that ignorance is dissipating – but where malice exists of a racist nature this can continue. Although, I have seen people question and challenge the racist perceptions of elder generations – and that is a good thing.
      A time used to exist when I could go for weeks without seeing a non-white person. Now, society is more integrated.

  6. Perhaps he gets fewer and fewer platforms for his views because more and more people, including on the right, are cringingly embarassed by them?
    One can only hope so.

  7. wow, I thought donosaurs were wiped out by an asteroid. how did this one survive?

  8. …white people “may discover what it is like to ride in the back of the bus”


  9. Does this man realise that it is 2012 and not 1712? what a freaking fool!

  10. Robert in S. Kensington 12 Jan 2012, 1:56pm

    Windbag right wing Buchanan is a vile bigot. How on earth could he say America was one nation during many years of segregation of black people, subjugation of women, huge income disparity between the wealthiest and the poor? He’s an absolutely disgusting example of right wing hatred of people who are different, be it ethnic or sexual orientation. What can one expect from an ardent supporter of the Vatican and everything it stands for?

    1. Well, according to most conservative rhetorics I read poor people are poor because they don’t want to work hard, so it’s been their fault all the time.

  11. Diddums!
    So only ‘straight’ people can be militant can they?
    Wake up and smell the coffee.

  12. Oscar Watson 12 Jan 2012, 2:43pm

    Who is this idiot?

    If “militant gays and people of colour” have been trying to keep him off the US airwaves as he suggests, he must be a real piece of work!

  13. Even the dreadful BNP don’t sound as extreme as this loony, who would probabl be arrested over here for stirring up racial and homophobic hatred.

    Lets hope America really is a different and more rational place by 2025.

    1. M Schwartz 13 Jan 2012, 1:11am

      Which simply shows the UK isn’t a liberal democracy, but moving closer to a form of soft totalitarianism. Demographic change is something Buchanan has quite correctly observed, is not always a good thing. Too many are cowed by fear of the scarlet R, to point out the obvious. The result is car burning in Paris, London riots, homophobic attacks in Amsterdam, rising anti-semitic violence from young Muslim men etc.

      Give me Buchanan’s honesty any day over those who want to censor inconvenient realities.

      1. Its strange that Buchanan recognises the need to restrict freedom of speech where hate speech occurs which hurts, harms or offends him …

        “They are partly right. The First Amendment does protect what they are doing. But what they are doing is engaging in hate speech and anti-Christian bigotry. For what is the purpose of what they are about, if not to wound, offend, insult and mock fellow Americans celebrating the happiest day of their calendar year?”

        An extract from an opinion column by Buchanan which discussed “anti-Christian bigots” (to use his description).

        He went on to say that such hate speech should be stopped.

        He also said:

        “Was it a manifestation of tolerance and maturity, or pusillanimity, that Christians allowed themselves to be robbed of their inheritance to a point where Barack Obama could assert without contradiction that we Americans “do not consider ourselves to be a Christian nation”?

        What are these Christmas-bashers, though still a nominal minority, ….

        1. … saying to Christians with their mockery and ridicule of the celebration of the birth of Christ?

          “This isn’t your country anymore. It is our country now.”

          The question for Christians is a simple one: Do they have what it takes to take America back?”

          All mixed up in a series of attacks on non-whites, non-Christians and homosexuals … its clearly evident who the bigot is – Buchanan …

          White supremacy, Black supremacy, Asian supremamcy … none of them have a place in society …

          Human rights and responsibilities do – Buchanan clearly has no understanding of human rights or humanity.

  14. Suddenly Last Bummer 12 Jan 2012, 3:10pm

    Ok, what the funk does ‘people of colour mean”?

    1. It’s sounds abhorrent to me but in the US it’s the “politically correct” way to describe people who are “non-White”.

      Every time I hear it though, I cringe.

      1. I’m a ‘person of colour’ … just so happens my colour is whitish/pimkish!!!! We are ALL “People of Colour” !!!

        1. Oh dear … my typing sucks!!!

          I’m a ‘person of colour’ … just so happens my colour is white-ish/pink-ish!!!! We are ALL “People of Colour” !!!

      2. Suddenly Last Bummer 12 Jan 2012, 4:10pm

        ‘People of colour’ means ‘non-white’? When the funk did this come to be an accepted term?

        1. I have no idea but it’s used quite frequently in mainstream American media by people who are black, hispanic and asian to describe themselves and others.

          To me it’s far too close to “coloured” for comfort, it almost sounds like people have subtly invented a new way of calling people coloured without them realising. I think my grandfather would have b!txh slapped anyone who called him a person of colour, straight to hell.

          Maybe I’m being overly sensitive but it’s not something I’d like to hear in the uk media.

          1. I know its an accepted term in North America … but it makes me cringe … it reminds me of the antiquated (and presumed acceptable) term “coloured” that was used regularly in the UK till (in my experience) the early 1990s – but as many a black person has said – so I’m coloured “am I purple, green …” …

            I do accept different geographical communities will use varying terms – but this one just does not sit right to me.

      3. Yep, it is cringe-inducing and has a horribly patronising tone to it.

    2. jamestoronto 13 Jan 2012, 6:37am

      It is a very commonly used term in North America and is not disparaging in any way. It is widely used by the very groups it describes. It is not a term used by whites to describe non-whites, but by non-whites to describe themselves. Personally I would hope someday that all reference to colour will disappear from general usage.

    3. It’s a really annoying term (I’d never use it myself), but I believe it developed because people objected to being described as ‘coloured. Personally I prefer the brutal honesty of ‘non-white’, since that – and all its implications – is what’s usually meant.

  15. “Black and white lived apart, went to different schools and churches, played on different playgrounds, and went to different restaurants, bars, theaters, and soda fountains. But we shared a country and a culture. We were one nation. We were Americans.”

    I don’t think that’s how black people felt really is it. How is it possible to be this stupid?

    1. Very Orwell – “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others…”

      1. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Jan 2012, 10:52am

        The scary thing is that he sees nothing wrong with it.

    2. Not just stupid, totally lacking in empathy too. Shocking.

    3. Pat Buchanan is an old-style Southern Baptist. The kind that believes slavery was alright, and that people who fight against emancipation and integration are upsetting some divine “natural order”. Pat Buchanan was the same man who said that the earthquake that killed hundreds of thousands in Haiti was punishment for them historically stealing their freedom from their French former slavemasters.

      The Southern Baptist Convention apologized for its support of slavery in 1993, but stopped short of repudiating it. They weren’t sorry about slavery – they were just sorry it made them look bad in the 20th century.

      Sometimes the Southern Baptist Convention really, really unnerves me. It was founded specifically as a pro-slavery branch of American Baptists before the Civil War. Today it is the second largest religious denomination in the entire United States (after the Roman Catholic Church), and is unapologetically fundamentalist.

  16. He is just another Christian racist that somebody should take out.

    1. David Myers 12 Jan 2012, 11:19pm

      “Take out” his ideas. “Take out” his phobias and hate mongering, but don’t stoop to his level by advocating violence against the speaker. He is dispicable and so are his ideas, but preaching violence against anyone is absolutely wrong!

  17. Char Turner 12 Jan 2012, 8:05pm

    Someone tell Uncle Pat that anyone that is not a bigoted asshole has been trying to get him off the air for years. That includes the moderates too. The real question is why has he been allowed to pollute the air waves for so long?

  18. This pitiful excuse for a man has shown himself to be a bigot for many years. To suggest that he’s being haunted by black and gay rights groups is probably testament to the fact that he’s shown relentless bigotry towards those groups for so long.

  19. So he is saying that when United States was racially segregated and black people had practically no rights everything was nice and good and now that white people are having to see what is being segregated America is going down ? Man, this is pure gold !! We don’t have this kind of clown here in my country !! (except maybe for Jair Bolsonaro, a far right-wing politician who thinks the violent Brazilian military dictatorship was a great thing for the country) Remove this speaksman for KKK from MSNBC ? No way, he should be given much more air time !! Don’t you see ? By attacking us he is making more good for the whole LGBT community than any of our activists could make. Ah, sometimes I love America and its conservative nutjobs !!

  20. M Schwartz 13 Jan 2012, 1:03am

    Buchanan is refreshingly honest about some of the problems the US may face with demographic change. Few commentator’s are brave enough to do this for fear of being accused as racist. However a lot of US immigration policy makes little sense if you look at the problems California faces.

    1. jamestoronto 13 Jan 2012, 6:29am

      About as refreshing as a dust storm.

  21. James Madison 13 Jan 2012, 1:57am

    Another white faggot bites the dust.

    1. Really, calling him a faggot?! Whats the need.

  22. Jock S. Trap 13 Jan 2012, 12:05pm

    Yeah you said exactly the same thing a few days ago but ignored the questions and prove you must have… or are they just another set of mere assumptions?

    I’m guessing the latter!

    1. It’s just a scammer, I think, Jock, promoting some website. I ignore it as I ignore all the “Genuine Fake Rolex!” emails I get.

      1. Its a spambot which I ignore ….

        Its annoying … but in a way less so than the likelys of Keith, Matthew, Neal, Stuart Browing and the like …

        1. Agreed! :D

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.