Huckabee is calling for their funding to be cut.

HA! Another week and another faux scandal for Bill O.

He’s been complaining about his ratings, maybe this will move him out of the dungeon and get him a little closer to his hero Beck.

What closet conservative masked as a liberal is he going to be able to get to come on his show now? Poor, poor Bill…with nobody to argue with him whatever will he do?

Gloria Allred is probably itching to get in on this . Big Eddie don’t agree with Juan on much , but he is clearly a decent man . NPR just sealed their downfall .

Generalize about tea party attendees — assert that they are racists — and the mainstream media has no problem with the statement.

Generalize about Christians — assert that they are intolerant — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

Generalize about Republicans –assert that they are hateful and stupid — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

General about capitalists — assert that they are greedy and covetous — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

Generalize about conservatives — assert that they cling to their Bibles and guns — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

But, heaven forbid, point out that terrorists acts on planes in recent years have all been committed by ardent Muslims, and express some concern about flying with them….and you get vilified, called a bigot, and fired from NPR.

A very revealing state of affairs, no?

felixw said:
A very revealing state of affairs, no?

Indeed.

Is so nice to see all the conservatives coming to Juan’s defense. A sudden change of heart or just another excuse to paint outside the lines?

Not so much defending Juan. Defending the first amendment.

sarainitaly said:
Huckabee is calling for their funding to be cut.

In American English, we have something known as the collective noun, in which an organization, a team or a group is counted as one. So, NPR, although many, is one, and the correct pronoun is therefore “its” not “their”. In British English this is not as clearly so. You’ll find sport readers speak of “Arsenal are …”. But, I know you want to be a good old Amerikan gal.

As for what Huckleberry is calling for, Tumbleweed, I can assure you if I cared any less I might seem careless.

writer said:
Not so much defending Juan. Defending the first amendment.

Is this the Randi the Witch Revised Non-Standard Version of Amendment I, or the original text, Kumquat? Because, in the original text, the Amendment does nothing to prohibit a employer from firing an employee for an ethical breach. Here’s the full text:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Even the gals on The View defend Juan Williams, but not the liberals here. Of course, Jello Behar was noticably absent from “View,” hence the reasonable discussion. I do believe if Jello had been there, the discourse would have been far different. There are many who post comments on this site whose “Views” are very similar to those of Jello Behar. Her absence made the above clip watchable. Jello is only tolerant when opinions and political correctness/lack thereof match her own.

Trouble is, the ‘ethical breach’ was saying something deemed politically incorrect. I know, King, that you believe any speech that isn’t coming from the far left should be eliminated. Others believe everyone should be allowed to speak.

We’re going to make a big deal out of this on The Factor. Immediate suspension of every taxpayer dollar going into the National Public Radio outfit. We’re going to get legislation. We’re going to freeze it down, so they don’t get any more money. This is outrageous.

Pursuing a bill of attainder, cool story O’Reilly.

If Williams wants to pursue civil actions for wrongful termination that’s certainly within his rights.

The Real Royal King said:
In American English, we have something known as the collective noun…

Few things have led to more trouble. The ability to refer to a large collection of people as if it were a single sentient entity has empowered countless demagogues and class-warfare-artists to con millions of unthinking stupid people into imagining that a thing called “BP” or “GM” does things on purpose, or is capable of evil intent, or emotions like greed. It is this mistake which caused tens of millions of stupid people to throw themselves out of work by electing someone to the presidency who promptly attacked their employers in the name of ‘cracking down on corporations.’

writer said:
Trouble is, the ‘ethical breach’ was saying something deemed politically incorrect. I know, King, that you believe any speech that isn’t coming from the far left should be eliminated. Others believe everyone should be allowed to speak.

No, Kumquat, the ethical breach was in damaging credibility. Williams would no longer be perceived as an unbiased reporter on Islam. He diminished his value.

BobHahn said:
Few things have led to more trouble. The ability to refer to a large collection of people as if it were a single sentient entity has empowered countless demagogues and class-warfare-artists to con millions of unthinking stupid people into imagining that a thing called “BP” or “GM” does things on purpose, or is capable of evil intent, or emotions like greed. It is this mistake which caused tens of millions of stupid people to throw themselves out of work by electing someone to the presidency who promptly attacked their employers in the name of ‘cracking down on corporations.’

Indeed, and I shouldn’t rise in opposition to your proposition to change the rule.

So Fox is gonna play terrorist now.

Gotta love them. Anyone you disagree with , just strap a bomb on and blow them up.

NPR has, for a long time, been on a slow, methodical and downward trajectory and they just hit the gas pedal.

ksecus said:
So Fox is gonna play terrorist now.

Gotta love them. Anyone you disagree with , just strap a bomb on and blow them up.

It’s all about the ratings.

Yeah, King. Williams should have said that the majority of the population, when readying to board a plane, worry just as much about the old lady using a walker as they do about the young men who appear to be from the middle-east. It’s totally insane, but it’s the politically correct stance. Only those on the far left are able to rise above it all and eye the old lady in the same way as the young men.

writer said:
Not so much defending Juan. Defending the first amendment.

See, there’s a mistake about what the first amendment actually does. The first amendment protects you from persecution from the government. It does not give you license to say whatever you want and not be held accountable by private individuals or private organizations, hence why people can sue over slander and libel and why an employer can terminate someone’s employment for violating said employer’s ethical conduct rules.

I agree, Orion. But when Williams merely says that people can’t help but look twice when they see young middle-eastern men getting on a plane, isn’t that true? Does that really qualify as slander?

I implore everyone reading this to spread the word and let people know their tax money is support this. We need to at least put a stop to the public funding. Its bad enough for a so called news organization to blatantly shill for one political party, but to do it with public funds is just over the line.

This must end and Juan must get his job back.

http://dronetek.net/

felixw said:
Generalize about tea party attendees — assert that they are racists — and the mainstream media has no problem with the statement.

Generalize about Christians — assert that they are intolerant — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

Generalize about Republicans –assert that they are hateful and stupid — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

General about capitalists — assert that they are greedy and covetous — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

Generalize about conservatives — assert that they cling to their Bibles and guns — and the mainstream media has no problem with it.

But, heaven forbid, point out that terrorists acts on planes in recent years have all been committed by ardent Muslims, and express some concern about flying with them….and you get vilified, called a bigot, and fired from NPR.

A very revealing state of affairs, no?

Quoted for truth. The hypocrisy being displayed over the last few years is mind boggling. Whats even worse, is so many of these left wing kooks don’t see it.

writer said:
I agree, Orion. But when Williams merely says that people can’t help but look twice when they see young middle-eastern men getting on a plane, isn’t that true? Does that really qualify as slander?

I don’t feel it warranted termination especially since they say he also followed it up with statements saying that it was an irrational fear and we should be using logic to over come such fears. He also has the right to pursue civil actions for wrongful termination, slander, libel, and ethics applies both ways after all.

The new CONgress MUST STOP ALL federal government subsidies to NPR and PBS. Why should we taxpayers have to foot the bill for these lamestream socialists to spew forth their lies, leftist propaganda and insulting double standards?

writer said:
I agree, Orion. But when Williams merely says that people can’t help but look twice when they see young middle-eastern men getting on a plane, isn’t that true? Does that really qualify as slander?

Writer, you know political correctness has to be consistent. After all, do you recall when Joy Behar called Christians who home school their kids “demented” and suggested that anyone sainted by the Catholic church must be on thorazine? She was fired for saying these cruel, insensitive things…..right? And remember when Maureen Dowd referred to Pope Benedict as a “sin-crazed ‘Rottweiler”? The Times fired her for her insensitivity……right?

I do seem to recall the left’s outrage when Jesse Jackson referred to New York City as ‘hymietown’.

Rupert Murdoch spent billions to create the Fox networks, but George Soros just bought NPR for only $1 million. And he’s already getting his payoff — Juan Williams is gone, Mara Liasson will be silenced, and everyone else working for the network will be intimidated.

I listened to NPR for decades. I contributed during their fund drives. A few years ago, when they got rid of Bob Edwards on Morning Edition, I immediately noticed the shift to a leftward bias. (He went to XM Radio and was never heard from again.) Shortly after I wrote a few letters of complaint — in the last one I asked that they return all the money I’d donated to them in the past.

So this is not the first or even second instance of NPR getting rid of personnel who refuse to toe a perfect liberal line. But I think this time it is a very big deal. Joe Biden has a more colorful way of describing what kind of deal it is.

Barack Obama once noted that black youths made his white grandmother uneasy. Jesse Jackson admitted that he sometimes crossed the street to avoid groups of young men who happened to be black.

If juan was not black, you think ms sealy would show ourtrage, I think not.
I like juan as well, his firing was harsh, but did violate a clause in his contract….as wacky as it seems, I dont think juan has a legal case….he did sign the contract knowing this..you play you pay…

sarainitaly said:
Huckabee is calling for their funding to be cut.

They’ve been trying to cut NPR and PBS funding for several years. Not a real surprise.

Williams was the only on-air talent AA that NPR had.

Such lib racism cannot be tolerated!

The Real Royal King said:
Is this the Randi the Witch Revised Non-Standard Version of Amendment I, or the original text, Kumquat? Because, in the original text, the Amendment does nothing to prohibit a employer from firing an employee for an ethical breach. Here’s the full text:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

It’s interesting that you quote the amendment, because by its very wording all can plainly see there is no verbiage regarding “separation of church and state”. It very clearly prohibits a Congressional statutory establishment of religion. I’m wondering where, however , it says anything about displaying a religious symbol such as a cross somewhere on public land or in a government building. Oh wait; it doesn’t say any such thing! Consider my thoughts to be both elucidating and rhetorical.

DaTruth said:
It’s interesting that you quote the amendment, because by its very wording all can plainly see there is no verbiage regarding “separation of church and state”. It very clearly prohibits a Congressional statutory establishment of religion. I’m wondering where, however , it says anything about displaying a religious symbol such as a cross somewhere on public land or in a government building. Oh wait; it doesn’t say any such thing! Consider my thoughts to be both elucidating and rhetorical.

It doesn’t say anything about telegraph, telephone, radio, television, FAX or internet either, does it?

Sorry for the interjection, but since your thoughts were not elucidating, I thought I ought not consider them rhetorical, either.

The Real Royal King said:
In American English, we have something known as the collective noun, in which an organization, a team or a group is counted as one. So, NPR, although many, is one, and the correct pronoun is therefore “its” not “their”. In British English this is not as clearly so. You’ll find sport readers speak of “Arsenal are …”. But, I know you want to be a good old Amerikan gal.

As for what Huckleberry is calling for, Tumbleweed, I can assure you if I cared any less I might seem careless.

As an Anglophile, surely you know that in America there are no Real Royals.

Cutting NPR’s funding probably isn’t going to happen. The much better thing to do – something that would have a far greater impact – would be to show NPR’s audience how they’re being mislead.

However, NPR’s supposed opponents aren’t willing to do that, aren’t capable of it, and aren’t willing to help those who are:

http://24ahead.com/n/10251

If you want to strike back at NPR, the first thing you need to do is get better leaders or at least get your leaders to be better.

Yeah Miss Kelly, Show those NPR listeners how they’re being mislead
For Gods sake if a media outlet isn’t foreign owned by
an insane austrailian and a muslim saudi prince
and doesn’t give you teh stoopid then its
JUST UNAMERICAN!

So basically, National Public Radio is about as credible as COUNTDOWN!!!!

LOL!!!

It was pointed out on Special Report that, if the NPR ethics rules are to be applied fairly, Nina Totenburg should be fired immediately. Her status is correspondent, she is never supposed to express partisan views, but she has in several instances in the last month.

so we introduce legislation to cut funding to NPR….Muslims are the last ethinic group you can talk about and get away with it…..everyone is scared of muslims…….yadda….yadda…yadda….I guess the interest in this topic with get the housing market and job market going…..and cut the deficit….NPR screwd up….are we gonna run this topic into the ground and forget about the sorry state this country is in…..???Lets not forget…we all have opinions and we dont like what NPR did, dont LISTEN TO THE STATION…………..Juan Williams is getting a raise on FOX NEWS AND EVERYHTING IS RIGHT WITH THE WORLD……lets remember….when i get on a plane ..if anyone start some crap…im gonna take care of business…………….

Who gives a sh*t what Whoopi says?

The Real Royal King said:
It doesn’t say anything about telegraph, telephone, radio, television, FAX or internet either, does it? Sorry for the interjection, but since your thoughts were not elucidating, I thought I ought not consider them rhetorical, either.

Oh for Christ’s sake, put the thesaurus away already. We get it. You think you’re smarter than us.

Classic sociopath.

It’s people like King who make me want to leave liberalism behind. The condescending, vitriolic, patronizing tone of everything he says just shows you how much the intellegentsia love to make honest conversation an anathema. King you must know somewhere in your heart that hanging out in your mother’s basement, smoking weed and typing on the computer at strangers is beneath you. Maybe you work for the government or receive some kind of benefits so you have a lot of extra free time? No where in the constitution does it say I have to pay for healthcare I don’t want either, does it? Or that I have to become a part owner of a failing car company. Or that I can’t say, that the people that attacked us on 9/11 are Muslims and I think twice when I see them at an airport. I agree with the left on many social policies but the way their pundits demean people who disagree is steering me towards the right.

Dronetek said:
I implore everyone reading this to spread the word and let people know their tax money is support this. We need to at least put a stop to the public funding. Its bad enough for a so called news organization to blatantly shill for one political party, but to do it with public funds is just over the line. This must end and Juan must get his job back. http://dronetek.net/

I really don’t think Juan wants his job back. NPR’s loss is Juan’s next employer’s gain. Like many here, I don’t always agree with him but Juan is a class act.

angiepangie said:
Or that I have to become a part owner of a failing car company.

Make that a double–Chrysler (which has now been bailed out TWICE), and Government Motors. Both companies were bailed out so the unions pensions could be fully funded. Had these companies filed Chapter 11, the union pensions would have been renegotiated. BUT this was 0bama’s payback to the UAW.

“I owe these unions.” Barack Hussein 0bama.

Update: While our ignoble occupant of the White House is running about claiming the Chamber of Commerce is a “shadow organization,” funneling “foreign donations” into Republicans’ campaigns, no one is talking about the donations of AFSCME ($87 MILLION so far), and the enabling of George Soros (a man who wants to see the USA economy FAIL).

With all that is so blatantly obvious, I find it difficult to understand how ANY rational human being could possibly support the progressive agenda.

The above said, it would only be fair to mention that the Republicans are only a marginally better choice.

Whoopicushion would not have made that statement had she known O’Reilly was defending Juan Williams.