December 7, 2007 Pat Buchanan made an apperance on the political roundtable talkshow "The McLauglin Group", the topic at hand, Mitt Romney's Mormonism via a speech on faith and politics that Romney had recently given. You may remember commentator Lawrence O'Donnell caused a firestorm of controversy when he gave his opinion Romney's speech and his views on the Mormon church. This led to an interesting exchange between O'Donnell and Buchannan on the show..
http://www.youtube.com/...
MR. O'DONNELL: Here's the problem. He dare not discuss his religion. And he fools people like Pat Buchanan, who should know better. This was the worst speech, the worst political speech, of my lifetime, because this man stood there and said to you, "This is the faith of my fathers." And you and none of these commentators who liked this speech realize that the faith of his father is a racist faith. As of 1978, it was an officially racist faith. And for political convenience, in 1978 it switched and it said, "Okay, black people can be in this church."
He believes -- if he believes the faith of his fathers that black people are black because in heaven they turned away from God in this demented Scientology-like notion of what was going on in heaven before the creation of the earth --
MR. BUCHANAN: Are you saying that his Mormonism disqualifies him from being president of the United States?
MR. O'DONNELL: I'm saying he's got to answer -- when he was 30 years old --
MR. BUCHANAN: He does not have to answer.
MR. O'DONNELL: -- and he firmly believed in the faith of his father that black people are inferior, when did he change his mind? Did the religion have to tell him to change his mind? And when he talks about the faith of his father, how about the faith of his great- grandfather, who had five wives?
MR. BUCHANAN: Well, look, my great-grandfather had slaves, and I don't believe in slavery.
MR. O'DONNELL: And his religion is based on the work of a lying, fraudulent criminal named Joseph Smith, who was a racist, who was pro- slavery. His religion was completely pro-slavery.
MR. BUCHANAN: My point is, this guy said his beliefs. He is living by the precepts of his faith. This is a good man. He is a courageous man in what he has said.
"He does not have to answer"
"He is a good man. He is a corageous man in what he said"
Keep in mind here, Mitt Romney has never once renounced, denounced, or rejected the policy of the Mormon church that didn't allow Blacks to become full members until 1978, in fact when asked point blank about it on Meet the Press with Tim Russert
on December 16, 2007 Romney again refused to repudiate the practice
http://www.youtube.com/...
MR. RUSSERT: But it was wrong for your faith to exclude it for as long as it did.
GOV. ROMNEY: I've told you exactly where I stand. My view is that there--there's, there's no discrimination in the eyes of God, and I could not have been more pleased than to see the change that occurred.
In fact, Mr. Romney refused and still refuses to distance himself in any way from the beliefs of his church.
Barack Obama on the other hand has made it clear that he rejects the "divisive" remarks of his former pastor.
we've heard my former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation -- that rightly offend white and black alike. I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Rev. Wright that have caused such controversy....
Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely -- just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice.
Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country -- a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America, a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.
As such, Rev. Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems -- two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.
But I wonder, would Pat Buchanan (and other conservatives in the mainstream media) be able to give Obama the same benefit of the doubt that he gave Mitt Romney? Surely Obama has clearly laid out his beliefs, surely since Obama has stated many times now that he repudiates and rejects the controversial words of his former pastor this would certainly be a non issue for Buchanan right? After all, Mitt Romney has never denounced, rejected, or repudiated the official doctrine of his church (which during his lifetime included repugnant beliefs about Black people, and the denial of Blacks full rights of membership in the church) and Buchanan himself believes that "[Romney] does not have to answer" those questions, and that even though he didn't denounce, reject, repudiate or in anyway distance himself from his church's officialy racist doctrine "[Romney] is a good man. He is a corageous man in what he said"
So surely Buchanan would give Obama the benefit of the doubt right?... especially since Obama makes it clear that he does not share the beliefs of his former pastor... surely Buchanan would cut Obama some slack right? wrong
It is easy now to understand why Michelle Obama, before Barack began to win, had never once been proud of her country. Who could be proud of the America that lives in the malignant imagination of the Rev. Wright?
Barack has now moved to separate himself from Wright’s rants and removed him from the campaign roster. And he will likely be forced, with anguish, to turn his back on, repudiate, and reject his beloved friend and teacher.
But it is too late for that. For Wright has, for millions of Americans, filled in the blanks about Barack. Wright tells us the kind of company Barack keeps, the kind of men he holds close, the kind of attitudes and beliefs he finds acceptable, if not congenial.
so, Mitt Romney, a man who belongs to a religion that denied Blacks full membership for the first 31 years of his life, never repudiates that policy, and gets called "Corageous" and "A good man" by Pat Buchanan, and it in no way reflects "the kind of company Romney keeps, the kind of men he holds close, the kind of attitdes and beliefs he finds acceptable, if not congenial". Or maybe it does, and Buchanan just has no problem with it.
Will anyone in the mainstream media point out his hypocrisy? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller....