I’m not really sure why the taxpayers are forced to hand over their money to a news organization that practices censorship.

You have Dem heckling on here. What about Bagger violence against Dems?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/10/26/2010-10-26_woman_stomped_on_outside_of_tea_party_favorite_rand_paul_democrat_jack_conway_de.html

I know surprise right?

Holy crap, did that guy really equate NPR to jihadist inquisition? What was that Major Garrett said about Fox embracing polarization? Maybe it was an understatement.

Obama defeated Fox News and the conservative agenda in 2008 and he will defeated them once again in 2012. Obama-Clinton 2012. Why bring a knife when you can bring Obama?

More Liberty said:
I’m not really sure why the taxpayers are forced to hand over their money to a news organization that practices censorship.

It’s literally impossible for them to censor Williams.

CosmosDan said:
It’s literally impossible for them to censor Williams.

Well they did. What you have in this situation is an African-American liberal that doesn’t tow the DNC party line 100% of the time – only 95%. The elite liberals don’t like it when an African-American has a slightly different view then they do. So what happens, they can him.

Leave it to Jon to show just how retarded a situation this has become.

“Is NPR an agent somehow of a jihadist inquisition?”

FNC…the fucking nuts channel.

btw, the Daily Show segment with the black guy and the Muslim laughing about how they like to scare white people was hilarious and relevant. Best line from Aasif Mandvi

“If they’re not going to make a distinction between Muslims and violent extremists then why should I take the time to distinguish between decent fearful white people, and racists”

CosmosDan said:
btw, the Daily Show segment with the black guy and the Muslim laughing about how they like to scare white people was hilarious and relevant. Best line from Aasif Mandvi

That was pretty funny, hence the fact that it is a comedy show.

ImJustThatDamnGood said:
Obama defeated Fox

Not only are you no damn good, but your damn memory makes things up that never happened.

More Liberty said:
Well they did. What you have in this situation is an African-American liberal that doesn’t tow the DNC party line 100% of the time – only 95%. The elite liberals don’t like it when an African-American has a slightly different view then they do. So what happens, they can him.

They fired him for cause but they can’t censor him. Whether you like it or not working for any news organization means you can’t say anything you feel like saying and there are contractual lines drawn between news analyst and opinion. Whether they apply those standards evenly is another question , but it’s not a free speech or censorship issue. Companies get to fire people when they believe they’ve crossed a line once to often.
Since he was already appearing on FOX and had been for some time, it wasn’t about censorship.

More Liberty said:
That was pretty funny, hence the fact that it is a comedy show.

Right! I think it’s great that comedy rooted in the truth can sometimes be far more relevant than so called news channels.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/25/florida-debate-foul/

Imagine that Mediaite. No mention of the Dem caught cheating in last night Florida gov debate.

BatBoy said:
Not only are you no damn good, but your damn memory makes things up that never happened.

I suppose he means , defeated them by getting elected despite their efforts to stop that from happening.

Jackie,
I’m no glad to hear you are against violence. I don’t recall your outrage when 2 Bobby Jinal staffers were beaten to a pulp.

More Liberty said:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/25/florida-debate-foul/

Imagine that Mediaite. No mention of the Dem caught cheating in last night Florida gov debate.

or that Rick Scott is a tattletale.

CosmosDan said:
Since he was already appearing on FOX and had been for some time, it wasn’t about censorship.

Actually last year NPR tried to get liberal Juan Williams to stop using his NPR analyst as an identifier while on Fox News. They’ve been gunning to fire Williams, their only male African-American on-air voice, for a long time. The message is clear from NPR. If you are African-American and you don’t spew DNC approved talking points 100% of the time…you’re out.

CosmosDan said:
or that Rick Scott is a tattletale.

I know. How horrible that someone wants to hold someone else accountable for their actions. You sure the heck don’t want that in a politician.

NPR is an agent of a Jihadist Inquisition, yep I totally believe that thanks for the titanic paradigm shift in my already fragile grasp of reality brought on by years of watching your brilliant news network, reading only those websites magazines and newspapers approved by my insulated peer group and a near half century of the slow burn of self hatred. Vote Republican!

Attention all Muslim passengers*: When embarking onto the plane, please take remove your Miniature American Flags from the package. Take the flag, in your hand, then proceed to wave it everyone’s face as you make way to your seats. We ask for your cooperation during this procedure. The “Jaun flag Jive” has been shown to help elevate extreme paranoia in the unwashed masses. We thank you again and enjoy your flight.

* This also includes: Catholic priests/nuns, Jewish Rabi and the Amish or any other religious sect that requires a dress code.

More Liberty said:
Well they did. What you have in this situation is an African-American liberal that doesn’t tow the DNC party line 100% of the time – only 95%. The elite liberals don’t like it when an African-American has a slightly different view then they do. So what happens, they can him.

You’re lying.

Williams breached his contract.

If you want to argue process niceties, well and good, but contracts mean something. They are one of the cornerstones of a civil society. We know from your comments about jack-booted thugs attacking people at Ayn Rand Paul events you have no interest in a civil society, but most of us still do.

More Liberty said:
I know. How horrible that someone wants to hold someone else accountable for their actions. You sure the heck don’t want that in a politician.

I agree. So if Scott was distorting the facts he should be held accountable. I guess we just need to decide if the debate rules are more important than the facts.

Honest, it’s minor BS

Which part of his contract did he breach again?

More Liberty said:
Actually last year NPR tried to get liberal Juan Williams to stop using his NPR analyst as an identifier while on Fox News. They’ve been gunning to fire Williams, their only male African-American on-air voice, for a long time. The message is clear from NPR. If you are African-American and you don’t spew DNC approved talking points 100% of the time…you’re out.

No doubt they were getting more complaints about Williams being on FOX from liberal listeners. I don’t agree with what they did or how they did it, but they do get to decide who their employees are. It’s a minor issue that worked out fine for Williams.

Seeing November From My Window said:
Which part of his contract did he breach again?

The covenant in which he agrees not to appear on any program without the prior permission of supervisory personnel and not to engage in commentary which might tend to convey a bias which would compromise his credibility at NPR.

Seeing November From My Window said:
Which part of his contract did he breach again?

The part that limits what personal opinions you should offer as a professional news analyst. The same part he’d been spoken to about before. Has he mentioned that at all while ranting on Fox?

Then why does Nina Totenberg still have a job?

The Real Royal King said:
The covenant in which he agrees not to appear on any program without the prior permission of supervisory personnel and not to engage in commentary which might tend to convey a bias which would compromise his credibility at NPR.

He’s been on FNC for years and there is proof of that. They just didn’t like what he said, in other words as an African-American liberal he didn’t tow the liberal party line 100% of the time. They can claim technicalities all they but the truth is NPR, which receives taxpayer money, is a bastion of elite liberals. And what liberal elites don’t like is when a minority step out of the DNC line.

Sorry King but the truth hurts.

Juan was actually employed by Fox for 3 years before he even started working for NPR, so I don’t think they have a case. They know they are shaky legal ground here because they let every other staffer spout off without consequence.

CosmosDan said:
I agree. So if Scott was distorting the facts he should be held accountable. I guess we just need to decide if the debate rules are more important than the facts.

Honest, it’s minor BS

LOL….are you serious? The woman promised to abide by debate rules, and she broke them. What other type of rules, and maybe even laws, is she going to break in the off chance she even gets elected.

More Liberty said:
He’s been on FNC for years and there is proof of that. They just didn’t like what he said, in other words as an African-American liberal he didn’t tow the liberal party line 100% of the time. They can claim technicalities all they but the truth is NPR, which receives taxpayer money, is a bastion of elite liberals. And what liberal elites don’t like is when a minority step out of the DNC line.

Sorry King but the truth hurts.

I understand, you support the rule of law when it suits you, but not otherwise. A tool as it were. At least you’ve provided an opportunity for other posters to understand the danger inherent in situational ethics.

More Liberty said:
LOL….are you serious? The woman promised to abide by debate rules, and she broke them. What other type of rules, and maybe even laws, is she going to break in the off chance she even gets elected.

And, as if on cue, the Holy Sanctity of debate rules, the multiple choice nature of contractual covenants.

It might give us guidance if you were to go though the Constitution and the Amendment and tell us which we ought to follow or insist others follow and which we ought to disregard.

The Real Royal King said:
I understand, you support the rule of law when it suits you, but not otherwise. A tool as it were. At least you’ve provided an opportunity for other posters to understand the danger inherent in situational ethics.

Show me right now where I have said that I don’t support the rule of law. Show me an instant where I said that.

The Real Royal King said:
It might give us guidance if you were to go though the Constitution and the Amendment and tell us which we ought to follow or insist others follow and which we ought to disregard.

I support the Constitution, not politicians of either ilk. Show me somewhere, or you’re a coward or liar, where I said I don’t support the rule of law.

Or is this another one of your “satire” comments?

More Liberty said:
LOL….are you serious? The woman promised to abide by debate rules, and she broke them. What other type of rules, and maybe even laws, is she going to break in the off chance she even gets elected.

And what other lies will Rick tell to the public as he creates policy. Accountability ought to be the standard for everyone right?

I’d say the smart thing to do is use the story to highlight Scott’s distortion of the facts.

You can always count on the King to stick up for libs who break the rules!

More Liberty said:
Show me right now where I have said that I don’t support the rule of law. Show me an instant where I said that.

You referred to the contractual covenant to which Juana agreed as a “technicality”. It is not. It is an agreement, a promise, for which consideration was proffered. Not a talking point. You have no respect for contracts and hence no respect for the rule of law.

More Liberty said:
I support the Constitution, not politicians of either ilk. Show me somewhere, or you’re a coward or liar, where I said I don’t support the rule of law.

Or is this another one of your “satire” comments?

No satire here. You’re just a sham and a fraud.

CosmosDan said:
And what other lies will Rick tell to the public as he creates policy. Accountability ought to be the standard for everyone right?

I’d say the smart thing to do is use the story to highlight Scott’s distortion of the facts.

I have no doubt that a politician is distorting facts. I simply pointed out that his opponent was caught cheating on the debate.

What facts was he lying about?

More Liberty said:
LOL….are you serious? The woman promised to abide by debate rules, and she broke them. What other type of rules, and maybe even laws, is she going to break in the off chance she even gets elected.

I am please to see that Ms. Sick takes such matters sufficiently serious that the aide has now been fired. Would that others be so accountable.

Seeing November From My Window said:
You can always count on the King to stick up for libs who break the rules!

You’re a liar. Ms. Sick just fired the offending aide. I applaud that.

The Real Royal King said:
You referred to the contractual covenant to which Juana agreed as a “technicality”. It is not. It is an agreement, a promise, for which consideration was proffered. Not a talking point. You have no respect for contracts and hence no respect for the rule of law.

I have complete respect for the law. And you are simply trying to divert and distract from the truth that it is you that does not respect the law.

The Real Royal King said:
I am please to see that Ms. Sick takes such matters sufficiently serious that the aide has now been fired. Would that others be so accountable.

So then you would agree that when people don’t do as the law says, they should be held accountable as per the law?

Since you respect the law so much, you would agree that individuals that violate our immigration laws should be held accountable, as well as employers that violate our employment and immigrations laws.

More Liberty said:
I have complete respect for the law. And you are simply trying to divert and distract from the truth that it is you that does not respect the law.

More Liberty said:
So then you would agree that when people don’t do as the law says, they should be held accountable as per the law?

Since you respect the law so much, you would agree that individuals that violate our immigration laws should be held accountable, as well as employers that violate our employment and immigrations laws.

I’m done with you. There is no value in arguing with a situational ethicist. Rather like trying to get a cat to empty his own litter box.

More Liberty said:
I have no doubt that a politician is distorting facts. I simply pointed out that his opponent was caught cheating on the debate.

What facts was he lying about?

I don’t know and don’t care since it’s a FL issue. It’s mentioned in your link.

Seeing November From My Window said:
Juan was actually employed by Fox for 3 years before he even started working for NPR, so I don’t think they have a case. They know they are shaky legal ground here because they let every other staffer spout off without consequence.

What’s telling is that even Nina Totenberg herself said last week it’s a policy that NPR isn’t capable of properly enforcing the policy, which she considered outdated.

NINA TOTENBERG: In the modern journalistic world, where people are asked to give opinions all the time, whether you’re a regular on a show like this or not, if you cover a story you may be asked to appear on a television show and talk about it. I think it’s a very, very difficult line to draw. And NPR tries to draw it, in my view, using rules that don’t exist anymore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b40m5qX9VI&feature=youtube_gdata_player

King says:

I’m done with you. There is no value in arguing with a situational ethicist. Rather like trying to get a cat to empty his own litter box.

In other words, I have no way to spin that so I’ll leave. Hey king, can you tell us again why you named your kitty FDR? I’ve been waiting for days for you to answer writer’s question.

That will be a looooooong wait. The King must be schizophrenic. One of his personalities says the Japanese internment was a horrible, racist thing to do. Another personality says to name the cat after the man who locked the Japanese Americans up. And each personality seems to be unaware of the other.

Writer, I’ve often wondered if the host personality is Olberdormann. Then the minor personalities are King, Iris, Ted, Rox, and Donna. You have to admit, that makes alot of sense.

Maybe at Christmas, all of the King’s various personalities can get together and have dinner. I think that’d be nice.

Seeing November From My Window said:
You can always count on the King to stick up for libs who break the rules!

You can always count on MichelleT/ soccermom,/Seeing November From My Window/ ???? to pad the all important thumbs count with her online dissociative identity disorder.

More Liberty said:
I’m not really sure why the taxpayers are forced to hand over their money to a news organization that practices censorship.

Given that talk radio is utterly dominated by right wingers and that NPR offers one of the few liberal voices in opposition to that, it really sounds like you are the one suggesting censorship.

Thank you, valk. You’re the only person on the left who has admitted that NPR is liberal.

Seeing November From My Window said:
Juan was actually employed by Fox for 3 years before he even started working for NPR, so I don’t think they have a case. They know they are shaky legal ground here because they let every other staffer spout off without consequence.

I agree , the policy seems to be exercised unevenly. I’ve heard several liberals say it’s long overdue, as if just appearing on Fox is a firing offense. I don’t agree at all, but NPR still gets to decide who their employees will be. I see it as a mistake, and a bad call for several reasons, but I don’t see it as a huge moral failing or a 1st amendment issue.

Agree, Cosmos. NPR has a right to fire whomever they want. But this phony outrage over Williams simply saying he gets ‘nervous’ is ridiculous.

The Real Rabid Kook said:
The covenant in which he agrees not to appear on any program without the prior permission of supervisory personnel and not to engage in commentary which might tend to convey a bias which would compromise his credibility at NPR.

Bullshit. He was working for Fox when NPR hired him. His contract did not require him to get permission to keep the other job he already had.

CosmosDan said:
I agree , the policy seems to be exercised unevenly.

Which is the sort of thing that gets such policies nullified in court.

—– 11-02-10 —–

Keep it simple, who’s speech codes do you and your family want to live under:

NPR = Vote Democratic

Juan Williams = Vote Republican

Jackie_Treehorn said:
You have Dem heckling on here. What about Bagger violence against Dems?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/10/26/2010-10-26_woman_stomped_on_outside_of_tea_party_favorite_rand_paul_democrat_jack_conway_de.html

I know surprise right?

Finally, the Conservatives are using the lib playbook!

writer said:
Agree, Cosmos. NPR has a right to fire whomever they want. But this phony outrage over Williams simply saying he gets ‘nervous’ is ridiculous.

Who exactly was outraged by that? CAIR? I understand their concern over comments like that don’t you? I think they missed an opportunity by complaining rather than encouraging NPR to have a discussion about the feelings Williams expressed and take the opportunity to give their perspective.

Bias is a bizarre thing and affects our thinking in several ways. Liberals thinking NPR analysts shouldn’t appear on Fox makes no sense to me.

But speaking of phony outrage. Considering Williams new job, I’m way over them over dramatizing the moral crime of him getting fired as well.

Cosmos, just look at some of the left wing posts here. Just for saying he gets nervous, Williams is labeled as a xenophobe, a bigot, a racist. A bit of overkill.

CosmosDan said:
But speaking of phony outrage. Considering Williams new job, I’m way over them over dramatizing the moral crime of him getting fired as well.

Money > morals. I agree.

The Real Royal King said:
Williams breached his contract.

You have no idea of the wording of William’s contract.

Even NPR hasn’t gone as far as to state that Williams categorically defied a written document.

More Liberty said:
Well they did. What you have in this situation is an African-American liberal that doesn’t tow the DNC party line 100% of the time – only 95%. The elite liberals don’t like it when an African-American has a slightly different view then they do. So what happens, they can him.

THIS IS COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

What is it that NONE of you seem to get, that Juan apparently pressed the lines of his contract with NPR repeatedly. Like his contract rules or not, they existed, he signed on to it and he broke it. So now you’re all against contracts? I don’t care at all about him or this story on him but a contract is a contract.

Seeing November From My Window said:
Jackie,
I’m no glad to hear you are against violence. I don’t recall your outrage when 2 Bobby Jinal staffers were beaten to a pulp.

ONCE AGAIN, A TEABAGGER MAKES UP LIES AND SPREADS THEM… WHAT ELSE YA GOT YOU RIGHT WING LOONS.. ANYTHING OTHER THAN LIES AND MADE UP SHIT?

http://gawker.com/5518928/the-tale-of-sarah-palin-the-beaten+up-bobby-jindal-aide-and-pat-dollard

KEEP THE LIES ALIVE. IT IS AFTERALL, ALL YOU EXTREMIST HAVE.

writer said:
Cosmos, just look at some of the left wing posts here. Just for saying he gets nervous, Williams is labeled as a xenophobe, a bigot, a racist. A bit of overkill.

I agree with you there. I honestly skip a lot of posters from both sides here that I’ve noticed have nothing to offer but their own blind partisanship and juvenile insults.

{which is different than clever hyperbole and sarcasm}

Cecelia said:
You have no idea of the wording of William’s contract.

Even NPR hasn’t gone as far as to state that Williams categorically defied a written document.

They’ve actually said several times that Williams has been spoken to repeatedly for personal comments made. Exactly how his contract is phrased, we don’t know.

Someone may have already pointed this out, but the Vivian Schiller’s gaffe did not include the word, “pyschologist.” She said that Juan Williams should have kept his feelings about Muslims between himself and “his psychiatrist or his publicist.”

Not to nit pick, but get the story straight please.

Was it comedy…or reality?!

just to note, visited the site to look for updates and saw that 970 cites are having restore sanity rallies. pretty damned impressive.

http://www.rallytorestoresanity.com/faq/