Posted on 08/21/2005 11:01:12 AM PDT by linkinpunk
Gay Rights TV Host Welcomes Pat Buchanan
Last modified Sunday, August 21, 2005 10:05 AM PDT
By DAVID BAUDER
NEW YORK - For the second episode of her new talk show, Elizabeth Birch welcomed a guest she knew much of her audience would have preferred shouting at instead of listening to.
That was precisely the point.
Birch, a veteran gay and lesbian rights activist, had frequently been matched against Pat Buchanan on the kind of cable news debates that favor the quick and the loud. She wanted conversation that promoted understanding.
Her hourlong talk with Buchanan can be seen starting Friday on Here, a premium network aimed at gays and lesbians that's available in nearly half of the nation's homes with television. "Birch & Company" debuted earlier this month with a Rosie O'Donnell interview.
"I have a theory that the gay community is craving more than mudslinging back and forth for one minute _ verbal assaults and then you go to a commercial, which is what it's really been for 10 years, in my experience," she said. "You never get a chance to really go down deep."
Long-ago talk show hosts Dick Cavett and David Frost are her models.
The personable Birch is a true Washington insider, a lawyer who spent 10 years running the Human Rights Campaign advocacy group before quitting in 2004 to help raise, with her partner, six-year-old twins.
Her contacts enabled Birch to secure a guest list that would be the envy of many shows on larger networks: Al Gore, Sen. Edward Kennedy, Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, "Will & Grace" creator Max Mutchnick, fellow TV host Chris Matthews and conservative commentators Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham.
Buchanan, a Catholic and former Republican presidential candidate who believes homosexual behavior is wrong, will probably never see eye-to-eye with Birch. But he considers her a friend.
"She's very well-liked," he said. "She has a lot of friends and she represents her point of view with dignity."
The idea behind "Birch & Company" is to give viewers a picture of the guests' personalities, filtered through issues that have been important to the gay and lesbian community over the years. But Birch didn't just want gay guests, and doesn't want to speak exclusively to a gay audience.
What better challenge to tackle than Buchanan?
"I want to be able to understand him," she said. "I want to go in there not with an ax but with a scalpel and try to figure out what motivates him, where do his values come from, and try to get people to open up in a way they don't have the opportunity to open up."
Buchanan, for his part, thought it was "was an opportunity to get our message out and de-demonize ourselves."
Birch asked Buchanan about his family and how his Catholic and conservative beliefs were formed. Buchanan talked about the Reagan administration's view of AIDS with an insider's perspective and about how his polarizing speech at the 1992 Republican national convention came about.
They went back two decades to where Buchanan urged the closing of gay bathhouses and wrote a newspaper column saying gays and lesbians "have declared war on human nature, and nature is exacting an awful retribution."
From Buchanan's perspective, the bathhouses were dens of iniquity where disease was spread. From Birch's, they were an important gathering place for homosexuals.
"It's like saying, `We want to get to all the Irish, shut down St. Patty's day,'" Birch said.
"Well, if there's poison in the beer, you shut down St. Patty's day," Buchanan shot back.
In another exchange, Birch asked Buchanan about whether he knew many gay people. He said he knew many, including some when he worked in the Nixon White House, whose orientation he didn't learn until much later.
"There's many, many, many more, it seems to me," he said. "They're all over the place!"
Replied Birch: "We came out."
Their discussion was cordial, if occasionally uncomfortable. No minds were changed, although Birch said she sees a "softer heart" than she did during the AIDS crisis.
"On an intellectual level, it stayed up on that level," Buchanan said later. "It didn't get down to anything grisly, so I was delighted."
Birch said that she was "tremendously grateful" that Buchanan agreed to the interview.
"He not only came and did the show, but he was gracious, cooperative, he gave us all the time that we needed and he could not have been more of a gentleman," she said.
At the end of the interview, Birch attached a postscript. She explained the difference between Catholic conservatives and evangelical Christians and said of Buchanan: "He is a man who believes that if you turn everything over to the people, the people will always make the right decisions. We know from American history that is not true."
The ending was the show's only sour note, sounding like an attempt to get in the last word or patronize viewers by explaining what they had already seen.
Birch later said she was speaking to Here's younger audience. She didn't want to show up Buchanan.
"I was trying to do a little bit of teaching at the end," she said. "I'm not sure if it will stay. These first few episodes are experimental."
Pat must be desperate for attention.
Seems to me Buchanan demonized GW Bush for speaking for certain groups that HE was trying to reach.
Yes judges make it so much better then a voting republic! Wheres her property? I just might want to have eminate domain take over to put up a Hooters on the site!
Well done for both sides.
Here's my take on Pat.
I think he's genuine.
I think he's kind of personable.
He's all about the "cult of personality".
therefore...
He's a media whore.
He's a social conservative - only.
therefore...
He's no better than your average Democrat. In any race where he was on a Republican ticket (US Rep, Sen, Prez), I'd (very reluctantly) vote Rat. Giving power to him would do more short and long term damage to Republicanism than a straight-up loss.
Yup, he's that bad.
Pat doesn't run from meeting people he disagrees with. He is a model for forthright American conservatism.
Exactly , Pat's always been a stand up guy . Many of the the issues he brought to our attention in the 90's are now coming to fruition . He's always been a man ahead of the times .
Except for the conservative part.
Pat, is there something you haven't told us?
I like Pat. He was conservative when conservative wasn't cool.
Pat doesn't like liberals cross-dressing as the new conservatives.
One of the things that had leftists really angry with Roger Ailes at Fox was his choice of a liberal to play opposite Sean Hannity. Roger Ailes wanted Hannity to have a foil.. a lefist who would always be bested by the right.. His choice was Alan Colmes.
Back in the late 1970s when CBS wanted a conservative who could be bested by any liberal they hired Pat Buchanan. Pat was so good at coming in third best against any liberal that when Ted Turner wanted a right wing buffoon to put up against his left wing talkers on Cross Fire, Ted hired Pat Buchanan.
Does anyone with a brain and even a tiny bit of knowlege about Ted Turner think Ted hired the best conservative he could find for Cross fire? Would Ted hire an appealling consevative to convert the CNN viewers to the right? Or would Ted want the most ineffective conservative he could find that would always lose to the leftist commentator opposite him.
It is worth nothing that Pat never does well in elections. His best performances are massive defeats. His attempt at talk radio was a disaster. Pat had a track record of being a media performer that couldn't draw an audience with a crayon. His TV career is limited to the role of losing to liberals.
Pat got fired by the Reagan administration for poor performance, and was hired by CNN for POOR PERFORMANCE.
To understand Pat's worth one need only look at who hired him .. who fired him.. and why.
Because, as we all know, judges and the government know best.
Pat doesn't run from meeting people he disagrees with. He is a model for forthright American conservatism. That's why he is in demand.
No kidding. I see no difference between the new "conservatives" and the liberals from 40 years ago.
Well said. 40 years ago, the liberals wanted the Government to take over the country, now as new conservatives they want the Government to take over the world.
Absolute nonsense . Buchanan is one of the best debaters out there . Ted Turner might be crazy , but not necessarily stupid when it came to good business decisions in the past . Buchanan has always shredded anyone that was unfortunate enough to debate him , and even the Klintonites had a bit of unease when Buchanan surged in 96 as far as a fear of debating him .
Doesn't surprise me, as Buchanan had the flamingly gay Justin Raimondo working on his campaign in 1996, even going so far as to represent Pat on Bill Maher's show.
That's the most laughable thing I have ever heard.
The Dems wanted Buchanan to win just as bad as we wanted Howard Dean to win in 2004. While watching Howard Dean on TC, Rove was overheard saying, "Yep. That's the guy we want. Right there."
No doubt Clinton and his people were saying the same thing about Buchanan. "I hope the Republicans are dumb enough to nominate that guy."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.