Is this the most important issue in the world?

What about the firing of Juan Williams by your news company for stating the obvious? I hope the Tea Party Tea spills all over you.

What a bunch of hypocrites?

Firing Juan Williams for speaking his mind is a cowardly, lame, unAmerican thing to do … but it is decidedly not a “liberal” thing to do. And yet some people think this is a sign that NPR is too liberal!

We do ourselves and our society a great disservice by limiting the freedom of speech in any way shape or form. I want everyone to courageously speak their mind; how else will we know with whom we are dealing? If racism, prejudice and honesty are buried they will only sink deeper into our hearts and poison us from within; better to have them out in the open, where we can fight them outright.

Juan Williams was just expressing what most Americans feel. Yes, believe it or not we pre-judge people by the way they appear and dress. Anyone who states differently is either a liar or a saint. Try wearing old ragged clothes and walk into any expensive store.

The apparel people wear can cause significant fear and concern due to the correlation of what sometimes occurs with individual that have that same appearance. It a natural survival mechanism like fear of snakes, etc.

The sight of a police uniform usually causes a fear reaction regardless of the situation. You just don’t know if you are getting the good cop or the one that wants to beat you to death.

The proper reaction should be to address why the apparel has come to represent violence.

The correct link for Nina Totenbergs’ hate speech is

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/will-npr-fire-nina-totenberg-for-wishing-jesse-helms-would-get-aids-105441948.html

Despite the outpouring above, please do not spend much time on Juan Williams (a self-reflexive, narcissistic press exercise). Rather, take some time to go behind the headline clichés about French “riots” to analyze why at least a significant portion of the French population reacts to crisis by defending its own interests, while a significant (I hope smaller) portion of the American population reacts to a parallel situation by defending the interests of corporate power in the “Tea Party” demonstrations.

On Don’t ask don’t tell, it seems the Military has added “don’t Act.” No military unit leader wants to be part of a report on the desk of a high ranking official in an action that doesn’t have a clear resolution. This actually does create a problem for the readiness of a unit. Looking the other way, or take care of the situation in an informal manner will create additional problems. The policy should be to report when told, but in a confidential way with an indication if the current situation effects operations. That protects the soldier and supervisor now the don’t act filter has been applied.

On Juan Williams, is it possible that FOX offered him a contract that required him to get fired from NPR?

Remember he has learned from the best, Danial Shore, getting fired can help a career in some situations.
I expect it adds to Juan’s credibility at Fox.
The question for him is, will he hold on to his independence?

I wish him well.

On the French riots, I would be happy if our citizens will just go vote.
I would like to see a record turnout, that is the beginning of having a representative democracy.
My goal is 80 percent that is enough to scramble the divide and conquer statistics of the moneyed interests.
It will change behavior in congress for the next two years, regardless of who wins.

Week in the News,

Rabbi(also a supporter of the tea party) from Cali is going to speak at an EDL british Neo-Nazi rally against muslims and then we have Uganda how journalist released an news article saying hang them all (in regards towards the gays there)

http://sheikyermami.com/2010/10/12/us-rabbi-british-jews-should-support-far-right-edl-group/

also reported on the bbc hourly news 9:40am Eastern

It makes me a little sad that NPR became one of the over-reactors this week in firing Juan Williams. First, NPR allows him to appear on Fox News where he is often, if not always, painted as the “token liberal.” And it is not so much that he is; he is offering the balanced view which appears to be liberal because Fox leans so heavily right. And let’s be real about it, The O’Reilly Factor is anything but a news show. There are so many of those so-called news shows that we have accepted them as such when what they really are is propaganda machines, churning out extreme left or extreme right nonsense. Most importantly, they are shows centered on opinion-giving more than on fact-finding. Williams is not the first serious journalist to appear on such a show and express a real opinion.

Second, nothing that Williams said was untrue or slanderous. We all stereotype and profile: the white man in a three-piece suit, the woman covered in tattoos and piercings, the black man in baggy pants and a hoody, and yes, the Muslim in traditional dress. While it doesn’t make it right or acceptable, we do it. It’s human nature. We routinely struggle to isolate the actions of a few without allowing the repercussions of those actions to affect how we see the group at large. I am a born again Christian who attends a conservative Baptist church and upon my identification as such, I am immediately associated with such disturbed and hateful people as Fred Phelps when what he believes is the furthest thing from what I practice and believe myself.

To fire Williams is simply too strict a punishment. Was what he said imprudent and offensive? Yes. Was it a fireable offense? Considering the milieu, I think not.

So disappointed in NPR over Juan Williams. Having him on FOX is a good thing for moderate, thoughtful discussion. The way this was handled is horrible. There should have been meetings, discussions with all parties and only then decisions made. This makes it look like everything I keep telling people is NOT true about NPR is. What a fiasco. After 20 years as a member of WBUR I am thinking about canceling my monthly pledge. I’m actually kinda heartbroken.

NPRs’ ethics code is very strict, and that is why I love NPR.

Journalists can’t even make a political contribution, yet Fox News openly donates to right wing causes in the millions of dollars in just the past few months.

Fox news is making sure the media targets NPR for it’s objectivity, which it seems to be unable to stomach.

The Juan Williams ordeal is a non-story. A news outlet fires a sub-par “commentator” for offensive comments on a tv “show”. Move on. There are MANY other things that should be discussed on this show.

Don’t cry to much for williams, for his words fox cable news gave him a 3yr 2million dollar deal.

But the astro-turf response to it by the far right is pretty funny.

Why does Jonathan Martin refer to Bill Clinton as “former President Clinton” and Sarah Palin as “Governor Palin”

why the differential?

Listen to the Onpoint guests cover for NPR.

NPR is a liberal news organization. No normal, rational, logical, or reasonable person would deny that. NPR preaches diversity. Where are all the blacks at NPR? Where is the black on-air talent? There are far more declared liberals, who regularly appear on FOX in a week, than conservatives who appear on NPR in a year.

On O’Reilly, Williams expressed his “feelings” when he is at the airport and when he sees people who first appear as Muslims. He did not express his “opinion.” These words are different and they have different meanings. Conflating these two different words just shows a lack of intellectual discipline and vocabulary.

NPR not only expresses liberal views, but it also shows its liberal bias in the following ways: intentionally failing to ask certain follow-up questions, avoiding certain topics, deliberately failing to feature certain guests and conservative authors. It is not just what is broadcast by NPR that reveals its bias and prejudice. It is what is not done or broadcast that also shows how biased NPR is.

NPR is politically correct. Political correctness is a tool of censors and cowards and a the way in which the left silences its critics. If you really do not want to offend someone, all you need to do is to practice good manners. However, the left uses politically correct speech to silence its opposition. They have chilled free speech. You lose your job in America if you speak your mind and tell the truth. All one need to do is to look at the global warming issue. Debate was immediately cut off by NPR and the left by saying that there was consensus and there was no need to discuss the issue. Yet there were many scientists who were skeptical about man made global warming. But they were declared to be not credible by the left. Can one imagine a subject that is any more complicated than that of the climate? Climate involves chemistry, physics, biology, astronomy, and geology. Many different extra-terrestrial and terrestrial forces affect climate, yet in the minds of NPR and the left, the debate is to be cut off. We now learn that there is nothing but problems with the data and climate models used to predict the effects of “global climate disruption.” (Gotta use the new politically correct phrase for this month.)

George Soros is an anti-American, left wing supporter of NPR. He has given NPR almost 2 million dollars. Does anyone really expect NPR to hire reporters that will offend Soros? NPR has liberal elite standards and will hire liberal elite reporters. Just watch. I am still waiting for the NPR stories about Soros, his political philosophy, why he hates the USA, the way he made his money, etc.

CAIR put pressure on NPR to fire Williams. CAIR is a pro-muslim organization that was featured in the book Muslim Mafia. If you did not read the book, you would know nothing about CAIR and what it does behind the scenes because NPR never discusses CAIR and its work.

NPR is corrupt and dishonest in its presentation of the news. NPR is white news for white people who are loaded with white guilt. NPR’s reporters must fit the liberal template and agenda, otherwise they need not apply.

Would Williams have been fired if he had said that he felt uncomfortable around tea party people? NPR would have jumped for joy if Williams said that on O’Reilly. Williams would probably have been given a raise by NPR.

NPR has embraced Islam. NPR has vilified Catholics and Christinity for decades. The hard cold fact is that NPR executives lay awake at night fearing that if they say anything against Islam, muslim radicals will take over their buildings and create another Munich. It will be their beheading video that appears on the Internet. Want respect and have people fear you? Chop someone’s head off.

Underwear bomber: a muslim
Shoe bomber: a muslim
Times square bomber: a muslim
The hijackers on 9/11/2001: all muslims.

All muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists who have killed Americans since 1979 have been muslims.

Keep sticking your heads in the sand. Living in denial is the hallmark of a fool.

Media Matters is calling for Moira Liaison’s head next. Stay tuned. Keep your head done Moira.

Juan Williams should have been much more careful in what he said – because that statement does help people justify their own irrational fears, and Juan of all people should have understood that. I listened to the full statement, and it falls short of counteracting the full harm created so NPR certainly needed to do something in response to that.

But I think that NPR handled the situation poorly. No one should ever get fired over the phone! The least they should have done is to hold a face to face meeting – it makes NPR look petty and cowardly. A better response would have been for his contract to either not be extended or for renegotiation.

As a nation we simply respond – we no longer think. NPR should be above all that, but sadly this showed that it isn’t, and has fueled the radical right.

Though the mantra is that Williams was “just being honest” it’s pretty clear that the honesty FOX news really care about is the ability to speak bigoted opinions frankly. I don’t remember FOX defending Jeremiah Wright for expressing his “honest” opinions.
Nor do I remember the outrage on Fox News when Helen Thomas was forced to retire for her “honest” comments about Israel and Palestine. Talk about hypocrisy.

Mr Marshall – your statement that “All muslims are not terrorists, but all terrorists who have killed Americans since 1979 have been muslims.” is just plain wrong and seems to ignore the home grown anti-government militia movement personified by Timothy McVeigh.

There are plenty of Christians breaking laws and involved in terrorism, but we are told not to judge them all by those few.

Let’s practice what we preach!

I could care less what government radio does; as far as I can see, its the polite face of the neo-con movement. But lets be clear about juan williams and what he said: ” … if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

first, that implies that there is an “American” way of dressing. If so what is it? Second, what about someone dressed as a christian minister or dressed in a nun’s habit? Does williams think that they are identifying themselves “first and foremost as [christian]” in some negative manner? His statment only makes sense if williams meant that dressing in muslim clothes implies that the person is probably a terrorist. And, as far as that goes, since when is it consdered wrong to put god above all else?

What this really gets down to is williams is condemning all muslims.

Juan Williams firing: I am reminded of the quote “You are welcome to your opinion, as long as it is my own”. Juan is clearly not a bigot, just expressing a fact. NPR is being more politically correct than objective and not allowing FOX to have a different slant on news than NPR’s view of the world.

What Juan Williams said is a different rendition of Angela Merkel’s statement that multiculturalism has failed.

What Juan Williams said was stupid and silly. I’ve never been comfortable seeing NPR news commentators on FOX and I also think Mara Liasson should be the next to go over to FOX. Really, as soon as a reporter/commentator becomes a story him or herself, that person should be gone.

To Jack:

Is it not a truth or fact, that people do feel that way when they get on a plane?

Juan was simply saying that that is an objective truth! And that we should temper and restrain ourselves when we have such feelings. But it is difficult for us after 9/11. Those are facts.

The “Truth” is that he gets nervous in referenced situation. You (we) can’t handle the truth.

We are intellectual cowards, and we wonder why we are so polarized. Its because we are afraid to honestly/openly look at other people’s perspective.

Afraid we might change our mind and threaten our allegiance to some group.

Pathetic.

Juan Williams in shock move to Fox? No, that guy was always the weak link on NPR. Good riddance.

Left wing/right wing media bias is largely a myth (exempting Fox News I suppose). The real bias is pro-corporate/business bias.

See http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=the+media+monopoly&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&cid=1039894377812154682&ei=Wp_BTKPbH4T2wQWuroTTDQ&sa=image&ved=0CBoQ8gIwATgA#p

Excellent book.

Can we talk about real news please – how about the fact that a Ugandan newpaper outed 100 people (supposed homosexuals) and is pushing for them to be hanged because of who they are – how about the riots in France – how about anything newsworthy MR wILLIAMS IS CRYING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK

Tom,

Anyone objective can see NPR leans so far left it is in perril of falling over!

Hi guys,

I just think that this whole notion that we can come to objective facts where our opinions and perspectives have been erased from the equation is outdated. Its time for the news media, including apparently some of the folks on this show, to realize that no matter what their personal history, knowledge, perspective, etc. will effect the stories they tell. Even if it is “analysis” it is an analysis from a unique perspective. Drop this media dogma about objectivity. It prevents us from being open to other perspectives because you have been “objective” and any other feeling or perspective is false.

@ CHRIS M

I could not agree more. Why are we still talking about this? Don’t make ignorant comments on the air and you won’t lose your job (unless of course you are trying to get hired over at Fox as Mr. Williams was after the “incident”, then by all means make as many paranoid/bigoted comments as you would like).

Fox News is clearly more main stream than NPR since Fox can have divergent political views aired without threat of firing.

Has NPR ever fired a comentator for being to liberal?

I really think he wanted out.

This was all about religion, and no-one is going to come out and say that jewish run NPR will not allow the rationailty of religion to be called into question. If Islam can be called irrational, so can judaeism. If judeaism can be called into question, the foundation of the pirate state of isreal is called into question.

It was bad enough that Williams was fired, but then Ms. Schiller showed herself to be as rude and arrogant as any Fox personality. Then she apologizes for speaking “hastily”, which appeared to be the reason Williams was fired.
NPR is supposed to really be” fair and balanced.” Nothing in this affair would support that. Ms. Schiller has given the conservatives who mock the network everything they need to dismiss NPR as liberal and biased. She has done something I did not think was possible – make Bill O’Rielly seem reasonable. I tuned in WBZ radio last night to for a traffic report and listened to the host and every caller talk about NPR’s hypocrisy for about twenty minutes until I just couldn’t stand it anymore. She has not only hurt the network, but a week and a half before a crucial election given conservatives one more reason to dismiss “the liberal agenda” and discouraged liberals one more reason to stay home.
I was going to write NPR to protest their unreasonable and basically stupid decision forbidding anyone from attending Jon Stewart’s rally. Yes, you really don’t want to be associated in any way with a “Rally to Restore Sanity”. Does management know Stewart is a comedian? Sadly, because of things like this I’m beginning to think The Daily Show is my only reasonable source for news.
If Ms. Schiller cares about NPR she should resign.

Fox News is not Conservative, they are corporate.

The Christian Science Monitor is the highest quality conservative news source there is.

Tom and Onpoint staff,

Please avoid on monday having parstian hacks on to discuss and follow up what you talked about today be it left or right.

Thanks,

Fox vs. NPR is sort of a false dichotomy. NPR may lean to the left, like the New York Times, but they sure deliver ALOT more information in their coverage than Fox. Fox emphasizes editorial content and sensationalism. The difference in style is more immediately striking than the difference in ideology. But there are plenty of right-leaning media outlets that deliver more facts, like the Wall Street Journal perhaps, that seem like a more appropriate stylistic counterpart to NPR.

Obama’s request for the stay explains why liberals are not eager to go vote.

Watch Fox for a week. Then go back and read NYTimes articles/comments. An open person cannot fail to see the equal fervor and irrational dogmatism on both sides.

From then on, watch some Fox, read some NYTimes, read http://reason.com/

Have a beer, relax, be brave, and think for yourself.

One thing thats funny when you watch a bit of Fox, is it seems alot of it is almost tongue-in-cheek, where they are totally self-aware how much they outrage dedicated NYTimes etc readers.

@ Brandstad

If a lack of paranoid xenophobia and obnoxious hyperbole is characteristic of “leaning so far left” like NPR then I will gladly choose NPR over Fox “News” any day. A news organization that actually takes the time to examine the issues and stories in some depth versus a network whose primary tactic is to drum up irrational fear with flashy graphics and the deluded rantings of uninformed cryptofascists. Easy choice for me.

yeah I suppose its never a good time to give equal rights to all americans -

people who join the service are told to check their opinions at the door,shut up, and follow orders – simple enough

Did Juan Williams cover the hearing of Major Nidal Malik Hasan?
Is it possible that experience would effect gut level?

In rural Kentucky it is difficult to imagine the gay population is 1 percent much less the 10 percent estimated nation wide, while in New York city ten percent seems a low estimate.
Perspective is important, Juan was trying to give perspective. We need more interactions between faiths and between race and especially between class.

Who standing at the corner of your property would make you jump as you carry your trash to the curb on a dark morning?
We all have prejudice, not only that, it is an essential mental shortcut,it has help us survive.

We should look at why we react the way we do, prejudice is weakened when examined.
Look at your own, it is healthy.

Pres. O is slowing DADT to appease military; which, if we can get beyond Juan, is fighting a few wars, as I recall from some news reports several weeks back…

Military will eventually yield, but needs time to “adjust” — not facilities or policies, but many of the “heads” of leadership AND enlisted. And as caller now saying, this just is not the time for a major distraction. Let’s whip the bad boys best we can (I meant “fight the terrorists”…), pack up our war gear and get home. Then, we can resolve the inequitable situation of gays along with the immense deficit and dismal economy which are bound to be with us for a while longer. It is a matter of priorities, people!

“She has not only hurt the network, but a week and a half before a crucial election given conservatives one more reason to dismiss “the liberal agenda” and discouraged liberals one more reason to stay home.
I was going to write NPR to protest their unreasonable and basically stupid decision forbidding anyone from attending Jon Stewart’s rally. Yes, you really don’t want to be associated in any way with a “Rally to Restore Sanity”. Does management know Stewart is a comedian? Sadly, because of things like this I’m beginning to think The Daily Show is my only reasonable source for news.
If Ms. Schiller cares about NPR she should resign.”

Right on Patrick.

Is NPR really banned from covering the Stewart stuff? Insane.

Sad to say, there “is” a liberal agenda. And more and more people are outraged at the arrogance of the “liberal” agenda, just as they were at the “neoconservative” agend a few short years ago. People want an Agenda of and by the People. That is so not radical.

And we wring our hands and wonder why there is a Tea Party……

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” SHOULD BE REPEALED!!! It denies homosexual individuals their civil rights — simple as that! Should civil rights be determined by what makes OTHER people “comfortable”? Absolutely NOT! That said, that was one of the underlying excuses that kept Jim Crow discrimination and bigotry in place in this SAME country!

Another thing I’d like to say about DADT: it makes the jobs of parents who tell their kids NOT to bully the kids who are gay that much harder when the gigantic, national institution called the Armed Forces is doing just that!!!

A close relative of mine kept getting pneumonia during Basic Training for the National Guard; therefore, he was in four different basic training “classes”. He was a closeted gay man (& remained that way for his entire life). Yet, WHO received the award for being the Top (cadet?) in EACH (i.e., ALL FOUR) of those “classes”?!!!! My relative! He remained an outstanding individual for his entire life until years of living with the consequences of a sports injury wiped out his heart. His heart was stronger than the “hearts” of the bigots who would keep DADT alive!

Do I think “Don’t ask, don’t tell” should be repealed? Yes

Am I surprised the ban has been halted:
Not in the slightest.

When anyone can serve in the military regardless of sexual preference, I suspect a lot of guys/gals in uniform who ‘fear’ serving with homosexuals will be surprised to find out how many have ‘had their back’ all along.

Public policy shouldn’t be based on irrational fears (mine or anyone else’s).

Did Juan direct public policy? I thought he was a political journalist, not an elected official.

THANK YOU for playing the Sesame Street song about African-American hair! Altho it may not seem like major news, it was, on the socio-cultural front. Thank you for recognizing that!

Juan Williams, entrusted with a voice on the public airways, is obliged to keep his “feelings” to himself.
He may not be a bigot, but there are plenty who are and are encouraged by his revelations.
“Discretion is the better part of valor” especially in these volatile times.

The primary reason Williams’ firing is a major story is because it illustrates what most are thinking – that NPR has a strong left wing bias, which they’d like to hide. You also have to wonder about the competence of the CEO. Bill O’Reilly’s show, in contrast to most of the programs on NPR, admit they are not a news program, but an opinion one. I accept the fact that O’Reilly and NPR have opinions, but give more credit to Fox for being honest about it (and I’ve seen the reaction of people on this web site, when anyone says anything nice about Fox).

Personally, I was not a fan of Williams – pleasant guy, but seemed a bit light. However this firing, based on all of what he said, not what people think he said, seems to show the narrow range of opinions that are tolerated by NPR management and, to some extent, the hosts and listeners to these shows.

Well, I don’t speak Arabic or Hebrew, but my tax dollars have been supporting Israel and the PLO for years. I don’t have much respect for Muslims because most Muslims don’t respect themselves. Where are the moderate Muslims? When are they going to go after the radicals within their ranks? Mr. Williams was fired for making an honest comment and NPR needs to apologize.
Posted by William,

The evidence for this that you see within the billion or so Muslims from around the world? This kind of statement and more from above in support for Williams reminds me of how ugly some Americans can be. We did this to the Japanese in WW2 to point of interning tens of thousands of them. While their sons, fathers, and brothers went off to fight in the war. Right now William there are Muslims in uniform putting their lives on the line for your freedom to say crap like this.

The 442nd Regimental Combat Team was the most decorated unit for its size and length of service, in the entire history of the U.S. Military. They did this while people like William here were demonizing them.

I’ve never given it thought myself, about Muslims on planes. I have more fear of the TSA taking apart my stuff and doing dumb things to water bottles than any women dressed in a hijab.

“Sad to say, there “is” a liberal agenda. And more and more people are outraged at the arrogance of the “liberal” agenda, just as they were at the “neoconservative” agend a few short years ago. People want an Agenda of and by the People. That is so not radical.”

Hardly, Bryon York, David Brooks, Matthew Continetti, are constants guest and brought on as experts on nearly all of the NPR programs, 2008 and 2009 still shows that the PAC’s and Think Tanks on NPR slant to the center and right in terms of appearances and citing by NPR shows, ATC,ME,TOLN,

NPR will often recycle stories with the fox news slant example (the Mosque at ground zero) yet reality it was an community center with an mosque inside.

NPR often takes the government side/right in reporting on the military and things that may shine a bad light. As well one could look at how NPR covers Torture and refusal to call it such instead going with the right’s Enhanced interrogation instead.

Lets not forget NPR has banned the word Teabagger on its website cause it offend some . As well the ombudsman called for the word goddam to be censored.

Don’t forget,

The censorship of Harry Shearer “the big easy” using the Dibs rule yet allowing for it’s staff to abuse it a few weeks after.

“admit they are not a news program, but an opinion one. I accept the fact that O’Reilly and NPR have opinions, but give more credit to Fox for being honest about it (and I’ve seen the reaction of people on this web site, when anyone says anything nice about Fox).”

Really? When did bill admit and others admit such? Or he’s not a journalist or his show is not an news program? On his radio show in the past he stated many times he’s the no-spin zone and reports the news as objective? Many cite his show as evidence and many times Oreily have stated that he was an journalist and considered himself an journalist when he interviewed President Obama.

What Honesty are you talking about? Fair and Balance? Brett Hume? Bill K.? Gleen B? Hantitiy? Fox and Friends? Laura I? Many times it’s stated that they speaking the truth and being honesty even when it’s proven later they clearly were not.

The only person I give credit to or respect there is Sheppard Smith who can(sometimes) call out the bull on his own network.

NPR has become a big and expanded player in recent years– since the $200 million bequest of Joan Kroc in 2003. They act more like a corporation, rather than the under-the-radar newscast they used to be. It’s a shame they couldn’t expand enough to accept Juan William’s view for what it is– an honest opinion, which in the full context of what he said, was blown completely out of proportion.

NPR knee-jerked.

As a liberal, I must say I’m appalled at the actions of NPR in firing Juan Williams — who I think has done a pretty good job of walking the political highwire for years! Talk about an over-reaction! Talk about hypocrisy! It does make one wonder why this happened within a DAY of George Soros donating 1.8 million dollars to NPR — in fact, the obnoxious and haughty Vivian Schiller personally announced the firing and the donation. While I’ve donated plenty in the past, I will never donate another dime to NPR.

CAM (Oct. 22, 9:59 a.m.),

Please don’t quit your membership in WBUR. My station in a nearby state lets us listen to two excellent WBUR programs: On Point and Here & Now.

Think about the extraordinary range of research that Tom Ashbrook and Robin Young and their staffs have command of FIVE DAYS A WEEK!!!

Not only that, but these two SPLENDID JOURNALISTS retain what they’ve learned! They can, when a caller or guest mentions a situation (political or otherwise) from the past, REMEMBER the facts and profile of that previous event or circumstance! I certainly can’t do that, especially on the RANGE OF TOPICS that they cover each and every weekday.

I find the same to be true of the other fantastic journalists (AND their staffs!) at NPR. Gustavo, above, wants to have NPR get rid of Neal Conan and Ken Rudin. I’d say the same thing about those two journalists that I said about Tom and Robin.

Think about how quickly Jackie Lyden (sp?) and others fill in for hosts when they are away. That takes AMAZING journalistic abilities!

I DO wish the head administrators at NPR had let the discussion about Juan Williams go on a bit longer, maybe even allowing public comment. Juan’s pieces HAVE seemed “lazier” to me lately, and THAT could be called into question via issues regarding journalistic EFFORT. BUT, throw the baby out with the bath water? I’ll ask you to please re-consider!

One more thing about Tom’s style of interviewing. I think it is amazing. Someone, above, said that he sometimes wishes he knew what Tom’s personal POV was, and then the post-er said something similar (I think) to what I’m about to say: I love that we don’t know Tom’s POV on MOST things; his style causes him to so often pull things out from a guest or caller by siding with them, OTHER TIMES by challenging them from opposite their POV! I feel that his style provides a DYNAMIC BALANCE, not just an equally balanced, staid set of parallel presentations, but dynamic balance where ideas come in CONTACT with each other and sometimes clash and othertimes underscore and confirm each other. It’s STILL up to us, as individuals, to figure out what we conclude from all of this, or, how much more we still want to investigate before reaching a judgment!

Thanks!

NPR didn’t say they fired him for violating his contract. The reason given was not that he appeared on Fox in violation of his contract but that “His remarks on The O’Reilly Factor this past Monday were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR,” http://www.wbur.org/npr/130712737/npr-ends-williams-contract-after-muslim-remarks

I’m a liberal Democrat so I’m not writing to advance the rights agenda by attacking NPR.

Tale of 3 Capitalisms

http://blog.iea.org.uk/?p=4879

“Tale of 3 Capitalisms

http://blog.iea.org.uk/?p=4879”

Kevin Dowd makes a weak case and China’s own staterun ecomony flies in the face of his agruement, as well U.S. investors and companies had no problem moveing companies and control to the China

Than we have credit defaults swaps that protect such shareholder where one could in fact bet on something they do not even hold or bet on both ends to still come out winner not to mention high speed trading that gives investors will large chunks of money a advantage of people that do not, so if an crass or down spin were to happen such Investors and shareholders have the ability to limit there losses or make an profit.

The only actual truth in the blog you link to is

“Not surprisingly, management remuneration increases sharply, and the focus shifts to the short run: long-term industrial logic gives way to short-term “pop” and, in the (all too common) worst cases, to senior management’s unconstrained Napoleonic fantasies.”

Of course the Napoleonic fantasie at the end is a bit much.

Shame on America

Racist
Sexist
Intollerant

Wake up. Grow up. Or Shut up.

If you can stomach the Fox, and get through the first couple minutes of the host, gets to Ron Paul and some basic ideas that alot of people are thinking about right now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h45Ivg7W4V0

Ridiculous–why on earth would anyone be MORE frightened of a person in Muslim garb on a plane?

Please try to remember: the hijackers did not wear Muslim garb. Why would a potential suicide bomber be so stupid as to out himself or herself with the traditional trappings of their religion when there are obviously so many narrow-minded, FOX-frightened sheep around, ready to attack them if they step wrong?

To Mister Juan Williams

How many hijackers were dressed with robes and turbans?

I thought a famous and educated journalist like you would have known better! I guess to be able to keep your job at “Fox news” a certain type of discourses go a long way.

I used to be a fan of yours… way back, when you were more honest, freer and i guess poorer. It was quiet astonishing to witness along the years, the change of sensitivity, from the voice for justice for the poor and minorities to the condescending star journalist “who had made it and if I could anybody can do it, BS”

You are willingly letting your image of “moderate liberal” be used to give Fox news some credibility with independents. For it alone, in my opinion, you are more harmful to the truth than The Glenn Beck, O’reilly, Hannetty and the likes.

Sorry, sir, but good riddance!

Some public stations are having fund drives right now… I urge you all to donate generously to counter the faux outrage by the right over the justified firing of Juan Williams.

These bigots and xenophobes deserve to be shut down mightily, and that’s easily enough done if we all stick together against the fascist right.

Am listening to this again tonight; really struggling to decide whether decision to fire ok. First. Shriller CEO messed up what might have been the corrent BUSINESS decision. Second, Tom A offer her the BEST snipper which hides her gaffe. Third, if NPR was so upset with JW’s Fox role (or comments), how the heck did it not deal with this in crystal clear terms prior? And anyone who really thinks most NPR programs are “unbiased” is not really listening with discriminating ear. And Jack — admitting that you “sometimes” show your cards is almost laughable. You are one of THE most regular guests on TOm’s show, and I frankly don’t believe that is “balance” — Juan may have overspoken what PCers will allow, but Jack is reguarly far left of left. Why is THAT ok?

Juan Williams was always a lightweight in my book. SO many times I’d switch stations when he was on. Not much lost, IMO.

I don’t think Juan Williams’s comments were racist. Stupid and paranoid–but honest about those feelings–and ill-informed, yes, but not racist. With the exception of Judaism (and, to an extent, Hinduism), no religion is composed of one narrowly-conceived “race.” This is especially true of Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism–all proselytizing missionary religions, out to convert as many human beings as they can. That, my conservative Christian friends, is why it is not bigoted or racist or prejudiced to attack the followers of Christianity or of Islam–these are things you choose to be, not things your genetics forced you to be, and even if parents/culture shaped you to be a believer, you can still choose not to be. Sorry, but while race is not a viable object of attack (and never was), as far as religion goes, it’s open season.

Came to the conversation late, and maybe you already covered this, but doesn’t NPR have a policy of not having its comentators expressing personal political opinions in the public sphere?

I have a friend of a friend who works for NPR who apparently can’t go to John Stewart’s Rally for Sanity, because she doesn’t want to jeopardize her job.

There is no such thing as “Muslim garb” except perhaps the commonality that many, but not all, Muslim women around the world wear headscarves of one kind or another in public. Generally speaking, Muslims all over the world, particularly the men, wear the same clothing as that worn other people in the countries and cultures where they live, whether as a majority or minority. Muslim men in Indonesia do not dress in the same “garb” as men in Saudi Arabia. Juan William’s comments reveal his ignorance and prejudice regarding Muslims and that alone destroys his credibility as a reporter, especially on NPR where we expect a higher standard than the biased echo chamber drivel that passes for reporting at most news outlets. His comments may also reveal a prejudice against women as it is likely that the only Muslim “garb” recognizable by an American man is a headscarf. So Juan is afraid when he sees a woman in a headscarf on a plane? That woman has undoubtedly been subjected to heightened scrutiny coming through security. What an irrational “fraidy-cat.” He should be ashamed. When I see these women, I salute their courage for facing the rabid Islamophobia running rampant in America.

Susan while I agree with you I don’t think the should have fired him. A heavy reprimand, let him resign if he wanted to. I’ve never liked his act myself, however recent messages coming down from the head of NPR have been absurd.
For instance, banning NPR employees from going to John Stuarts rally?

What is the idea behind that?

If NPR was trying to champion neutrality and objectivity in firing Juan Williams, then why is everyone crying that this is proof of their liberal bias?

If NPR was genuinely firing him because he was making bigoted comments, then why did they choose a segment in which he was actually trying to defend Muslims against bigotry?

If NPR objects to Juan Williams for appearing on a program that feeds off of soundbites and misdirection, then why did NPR use a soundbite out of context and misdirection to justify their firing of Mr. Williams?

If NPR objects to Juan Williams expressing an opinion . . . then why is it that no one can tell me what that opinion even was? Was it Mr. Williams opinion that we should all fear Muslims? No? Then why was he fired?

If he wasn’t fired for his opinion, then why does NPR management say that he was?

If NPR believes it is just demanding journalistic standards, then why is everyone so outraged?

If Juan Williams had a long string of offenses, then why can’t anyone name more than the comment he made about Mrs. Obama?

10 years of excellent journalism and contribution to NPR — I always found him to be one of the more insightful commentators — and he gets shafted for defending Muslims against bigotry?

NPR seems to have done this out of an intolerance for Fox News — and I don’t blame them — but why is it that today I’m having a hard time separating the two organizations?

“As for Ann, in VT, I too enjoy listening. But I will no longer put my $$ behind this org — not a good cause anymore.” Roberto, Oct. 22, 7:29 p.m.

Roberto, does that mean you are going to stop listening? We’re all doing a lot of talking about ethics. What about the ethics of listening regularly to NPR without pledging? (I’m not saying that YOU might do this.) This incident COULD spell financial difficulty for NPR. I firmly believe in pledging if you listen, even if you can only afford a small amount. If everyone gives what they can, the system can work. Right now Sarah Palin, apparently, is already urging that NPR’s miniscule amount of federal funding be taken away from NPR due to this incident. If that were to happen, it would be even more imperative that we all give. I think the Right is flying like a vulture over this incident just because they want to de-fund the network. The idea of that woman dismantling such a brilliant public asset is appalling. So, I’m just asking, if you say you’re not going to pledge, are you still going to listen?

Ann (not the Ann in VT)

“It is strange that in the same week Soros buys into NPR”

oh I get it, NPR and Soro’s planned to have Juan on Bill O show and say what he did.

Makes perfect sense. :O, in need of a bridge i’m selling?

Correction it was 7 Million

“What do tell does that tell you? It’s 7 times what Soros gave.”

NPR is making the deal with the devil by taking money from the radical leftist George Soros.

Vivian Schiller should be fired. Her firing of Juan Williams was totally unjustified and smacked of political correctness gone wild. And her off-handed comments that Juan’s psychiatrist and PR person should be consulted to get a better understanding of his “feelings” were disgusting. Juan Williams is a decent thoughtful spokesperson for moderate liberal points of view . His is a voice of reason that NPR and America needs to hear more of , not less. NPR’s reaction smacks of absolute hypocrisy. As other posters have said, had Juan criticized the Tea party as racists, Sarah Palin, etc then no problem. Moreover , where was Ms Schiller when Nina Totenberg made her disgusting comments about Jessie Helms?

Regarding NPR’s firing of Juan Williams, based on the statements of NPR executives it would seem to me that it was based on Williams’ statements, rather than a specific contract violation. However, none of us are privy to the specific contract betweeen Williams and NPR so we really can not have an informed opinion on whether Williams violated his contract and if so whether NPR treated contract violations by other journalistsin a similar manner. If Williams was fired for his statements, it sets a dangerous precedent when news organizations (exepcially those who receive tax payer financing)fire journalists for giving opinions, particulary when the journalist’s job is at least partially related to editorial type programming.

I am genuinely offended that Mr.Ashbrook did not push back on your guest, Ms. Tumulty, on her proclamation that she’s objective in her reporting and analysis. Ironically, the implicit biases that penetrate us all seemed to be the very point Juan Williams made on Fox, though sadly his comments were cut and cropped like the firing that happened just a few months back. Mr. Williams was cleary hammering the point that objectivity is a farce. Would it had been better had be depersonalized his point and simply mentioned empirical research? What about all the Pew Research center evidence on implicit bias, or that recent Harvard psychology study? I wish that your guests were as courageous as Juan. Worse, Mr. Ashbrook, even you made one of those classic PC blunders when reporting about the viral “I Love my Hair” Sesame Street video. In your introduction, you originally said that the video “raced” to top, but your corrected yourself and used a less racy word. That’s horrible because the pun was funny, but you treated it as if it were some slur. That’s PC culture, and you demonstrated your own implicit discomfort with ‘race’ as a subject, which is precisely what Juan WIlliams owned up to on Fox. Yet, unless we all own up to our own genuine lack of comfort in discussing race in mixed company, then those voices, like Mr. WIlliams’, will be erased.

Hi Rob,

I have to question your #’s stated by the Center for Public Integrity these such groups are estimated to spending 500 Million that’s 360 million more than what you stated, The center expects GOP-aligned groups will likely outspend their Democratic counterparts by more than 30%.

As well The Chamber has stated more than once that they plan to spend over $75 million american crossroads 50 Million and this is only adding up the 2 parts of American cross roads and the Chamber

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/05/american-crossroads-and-affiliate-announce-major-ad-buy/

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/10/the_chamber_of_commerce_is_app.html

buddhaclown has made one of the best comments I’ve read in a long while here October 22nd, 2010 at 11:29 PM.

As one who regularly defends NPR from people who watch FOX News and use that platform to judge NPR’s lean (relative to FOX, NPR is a socialist conspiracy) I have to say Schiller may have gone too far if she fired Williams to defend against uneducated folks calling NPR a left leaning organization.

Many people who judge NPR as left leaning don’t know the difference between editorial commentary and news reporting because they watch FOX and FOX mixes the two constantly. FOX news anchors drop their opinions while reporting news regularly and whether or not you think NPR newscasters (not talk radio hosts) do this, in all the years I’ve listened to NPR news I think they’ve attempted to keep it neutral.

To be fair (and balanced), MSNBC does this as well with their news and I don’t like it even though it’s closer to my political lean. Rachel Maddow’s show is not a news show, it’s opinion and I happen to agree and like it but I know the difference.

For those who don’t know, onPoint is not an NPR news show and doesn’t come out of National Public Radio’s “mothership.” Morning Edition and All Things Considered are NPR’s news magazines but even within those shows there’s news reporting and there’s opinion (the late Schorr, David Brooks) and I think both shows do an excellent job of keeping things separate, even if some listeners don’t know the difference.

I love onPoint but I know that it reflects Tom Ashbrook’s and the show’s producers’ filters on what’s newsworthy and which guests to bring on. While I think Tom does a good job of attempting to keep it even (relative to FOX or MSNBC) he’s got opinions and they leak in. No problem, those who don’t like his opinions or leanings can change channels. onPoint is not NPR news, it’s onPoint.

To assume that every show on NPR or FOX or MSNBC has to be neutral is naive. I love that Rachel Maddow has a show but for news, I watch PBS NewsHour. FOX can do as they please, of course, but it’s up to us to understand the difference between news and opinion. Don’t watch Maddow or O’Reilly for news, watch them for opinion and know what you’re getting.

It may be that Schiller went too far in firing Juan Williams but I do think what she’s attempting to do is worthwhile: to keep personal opinion out of reporting and keep it on the op/ed page.

This is why she’s preventing her staff from attending (even to report on) the John Stewart rally on the mall. Is this going too far? Maybe but again, what she’s attempting to do is to keep her reporters out of the editorial opinion area as much as possible to differentiate NPR from FOX and MSNBC.

It’s a shame that this incident has already backfired on her because I think her intensions were good, even if poorly executed.

Hi Rob,

I try to check out for that 87.5 Million and found this,by the Wastinton Post (hardly liberal)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaign/2010/spending/American-Federation-of-State-County-and-Municipal-Employees.html

American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees has reported spending a total of $7,488,083 on independent campaigning so far this year, with 100% benefiting Democratic candidates. Back to group list.

Could you help, the only source i found stating otherwise was Fox News.

Thanks,

“I don’t understand all the posters who routinely rail against Fox News. It’s 6:00pm news with Brett Baer is informative , “fair and balanced” and its panel discussion with Charles Krauthammer, Juan Williams, et.al is always interesting and thought-provoking.”

And i’m sure you believe such, Bill K, Charles Krauthammer is hardly informative and an highly partisan on nearly every show, the National Review proves this out. As for Oreily He states himself that he is an journalist remember “NO SPIN ZONE” and it would be only obvious Juan appearing on his show or Hantity is not the brightest thing, as well Juan has substituted has hosted on the OReily show as well. Hardly an Red Herring like the poster claims it.

Check out if you like,

Geraldo Criticizes Bret Baier, Compares Him to Olbermann

Even Brett interview with obama was Partisan and he kept interrupting the president
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNdLZA1rwx0

Most of the guest on Brett show writes on this website and are hardly informative or fair.
http://www.nationalreview.com/

If you like or anyone else do not believe such i can post some shows showing what i stated.

Thanks for the clarification and i agree it’s a vicious cycle, what are your thoughts on disclosure?

The Most Biased Name in News
Fox News Channel’s extraordinary right-wing tilt

“I challenge anybody to show me an example of bias in Fox News Channel.”–Rupert Murdoch (Salon, 3/1/01)

Years ago, Republican party chair Rich Bond explained that conservatives’ frequent denunciations of “liberal bias” in the media were part of “a strategy” (Washington Post, 8/20/92). Comparing journalists to referees in a sports match, Bond explained: “If you watch any great coach, what they try to do is ‘work the refs.’ Maybe the ref will cut you a little slack next time.”

But when Fox News Channel, Rupert Murdoch’s 24-hour cable network, debuted in 1996, a curious thing happened: Instead of denouncing it, conservative politicians and activists lavished praise on the network. “If it hadn’t been for Fox, I don’t know what I’d have done for the news,” Trent Lott gushed after the Florida election recount (Washington Post, 2/5/01). George W. Bush extolled Fox News Channel anchor Tony Snow–a former speechwriter for Bush’s father–and his “impressive transition to journalism” in a specially taped April 2001 tribute to Snow’s Sunday-morning show on its five-year anniversary (Washington Post, 5/7/01). The right-wing Heritage Foundation had to warn its staffers not to watch so much Fox News on their computers, because it was causing the think tank’s system to crash.

When it comes to Fox News Channel, conservatives don’t feel the need to “work the ref.” The ref is already on their side. Since its 1996 launch, Fox has become a central hub of the conservative movement’s well-oiled media machine. Together with the GOP organization and its satellite think tanks and advocacy groups, this network of fiercely partisan outlets–such as the Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal editorial page and conservative talk-radio shows like Rush Limbaugh’s–forms a highly effective right-wing echo chamber where GOP-friendly news stories can be promoted, repeated and amplified. Fox knows how to play this game better than anyone.

Rounding out the panel is its third-most-frequent pundit, Mara Liasson, who sits on the opposite side of the table from the conservative Barnes, implicitly identifying her as a liberal. But her liberalism consists of little more than being a woman who works for National Public Radio; she has proposed that “one of the roots of the problem with education today is feminism” (Talk of the Nation, 5/3/01); she declares that “Jesse Jackson gets away with a lot of things that other people don’t” (Special Report, 6/21/00); she calls George W. Bush’s reversal on carbon dioxide emissions “a small thing” (3/14/01), campaign finance reform “an issue that . . . only 200 people in America care about” (3/19/01) and slavery reparations “pretty much of a non-issue” (3/19/01).

Less frequent Special Report panelists include conservative Washington Times reporter Bill Sammon, centrist Fortune writer Jeff Birnbaum and NPR host Juan Williams. Williams, the only guest who could plausibly claim to be a liberal, was so outraged over attacks on his friend Clarence Thomas that he declared that “liberals have become monsters” (Washington Post, 10/10/91), denouncing the “so-called champions of fairness: liberal politicians, unions, civil rights groups and women’s organizations.” Indeed, Fox’s crew of “liberal” pundits seems almost calculated to be either ineffective left-of-center advocates or conciliatory moderates. Ironically, perhaps the only Fox commentator who consistently presents a strong progressive perspective–that is, critical of corporate power and militarism, and sympathetic to progressive social movements–is FAIR founder Jeff Cohen, a weekly panelist on the weekend media show Fox News Watch.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1067

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/stand_up_for_npr/?r_by=11971-2972575-Y2fdOqx&rc=confemail

Tell Congress: Don’t cave to Sarah Palin. Stand up for NPR!

“The late Daniel Schorr gave strong opinions as senior analyst and they were separate from the news and labeled as such on NPR. Those opinions, even in his last years, were educated and well thought out and very insightful. Williams was no Schorr.”

So long as we have the “right” opinions then.

First off Dan Schorr was light years ahead of Williams in integrity and professionalism. You would never hear Dan Schorr saying every time he fly’s and sees a Muslim he feels unsafe. Who says things like that?

How does he know who is a Muslim? By Hijab the women are wearing? By what? The fezzes? Or the keffiyeh?
Which of the billion or so Muslims is he talking about?

Susan:

Furthermore, those liberals who got their undies in a twist over this picture, need to know that there’s no such thing as a “Muslim garb”:

http://www.obamablog08.com/2008/07/16/obama-new-yorker-cover/

I always thought that the left and NPR were tolerant and unbiased. The Williams NPR matter shows that it is the American left and NPR that are the most intolerant, the most bigoted, the most biased, the most prejudicial, the most radical, and the most corrupt, dishonest, ad perverted.

Danial Schoor was one of the most biased and prejudicial reporters. All you had to do was to listen to him to kjnow that. He never had a critial or negative thing to say about the dems and libs. He always criticized the right.

Pay attention to not only what is said, but also to what not is not said.

CAIR and PBS are in bed with each other.

Soros and NPR are in bed with each other.

Time to defund NPR. Time to defuund PBS. Time for the multiple decade old “children” to grow up and leave the nest. If the amount of Federal funds is so small then, PBS and NPR should not miss the money. We can then stop the charade that public TV and public radio are unbiased. They can then broadcast without the support of the Federal government. Grow up and compete in the world of the media.

Again, well said buddhaclown.

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that maybe Williams and Fox staged this to give NPR a black eye (no pun intended) and jump start his solo career on Fox.

“What if the very act of being objective promotes a left wing agenda? What if being objective appears like left wing propaganda to a right wing person?”

Again, I can sympathize with that idea, and felt exactly like that. But when it comes to political-economic theory, I just don’t believe their is scientific evidence to solve the debates, so that any reporting of reality, can not support any “agenda”.

I do know I was always infuriated by the word “liberal” that was such a pigeonhole. I always said, “how about ‘right’!” (as in correct) as you imply.

But when we are arguing (as it seems these days) about fundamentally re-visiting the concepts of Constitutional government, role and size of government, Well-meaning, centralized planning vs. individual freedom and choices driving our direction, I don’t see how you can easily call one right.

And, regardless of how lame, cheesy, obstinate, profit-driven, crafty or infuriating Fox news is, they are one of the only mainstream outlets that will give some of what is mentioned above, an airing. Crass and arrogant and mixed up with religious nuttery overtones that it is.

When NPR starts exploring Austrian economics and Libertarian ideals and the nature of the Federal Reserve, and Ron Paul, educating people about what the ideas are so people can make up their own minds, then we won’t need Fox to do it.

But I am not convinced that there is not a status quo “machine” or “elite” who are very comfortable with our corrupt status quo, and who consciously or not, do not want to reexamine the fundamentals of our governance/self-governance. And while it is soooo hard not to throw the baby out with the bathwater when you flip on Fox, that is what I think so many good-intentioned people do.

Dave, you have given us such food for thought, and so articulately! The various “middle grounds” (NOT exactly your phrasing) you suggest we try to find, instead of being comprised of mushy, wimpy compromises, are worth exploring.

Do we live THRU television so much, with its tendency to be impressive by creating extreme situations that pose as normalcy, that we have have neglected the exploration of the rich world between polarities?

I have noticed this on social issues: many people opened up to new ideas in the Sixties, but now, decades later, sometimes we can only see the old paradigms and their exact, measured opposites (which we’ve come to accept as plausible alternatives); but, that wide, deep world in the middle — we’re BLIND to it. We don’t “mine” it for ideas.

I actually think The Powerful (networks, parties, PACs, etc.) do NOT think this way, but they’ve learned that we do, and they exploit that….the chicken & egg thing at work.

There’s much to think about on this webpage, and your last few thoughts really gave my mind a shift, especially when you suggested a “continuum to further understanding and approaching truth on issues, than (instead) entrusting the “truth” to a centralized few, who are so enlightened that we can turn our liberties over to them, trusting they will always do the right thing.” Thanks!!!!!

Shame on NPR for firing Juan Williams.
And shame on the show’s commentators for pussyfooting around the issue.

More important than being a statement about JW-NPR-Fox, it bodes badly for common sense and discussion of controversial themes that should, nay, must be addressed in open forums to explore and weigh the merits. And this should/must be done by thoughtful, knowledgeable people…such as JW.

Why don’t we hear clips from the original show giving the fuller context of William’s argument for rationality over fear? (1) To play this one clip is irresponsible — classic SoundBite Incitement Syndrome. (2) Not to mention that the tempered comments in this clip were far from incendiary. Most people, even if hearing them makes us cringe a little, can understand them. (3) And let’s remember: to show empathy and understanding — such valuable, and lacking, qualities in American political discourse — is not to offer a ringing endorsement.

Why can’t we (press included, perhaps especially) acknowledge fears (legitimate and not) and still champion reason. To ask people to ignore that a significant amount of anti-US violence has been perpetrated by Muslims (many of whom themselves have connected the violence with their faith) does not negate or deny that the majority of Muslims do not subscribe to this ideology and aren’t happy when havoc is wreaked in the name of their faith.

Come on, folks! Let’s be a little more comprehensive in our thinking and thoughtful in our listening… We can do it!

Opinions from Americans: http://www.aolnews.com/elections-video/article/what-america-thinks-the-most-important-issues-are/19681019

Interesting…

Funny how it’s always “progressives” that : enforce a speech code ( political correctness) , attempt to shut down opposing points of view ( Fox News , the ” fairness doctrine”), shout down opposing points of view ( witness conservative speakers at university gatherings), use slurs and emotionally charged labels rather than engage in honest debate with opposing views ( calling tea party members “racists” , “nazis” , or “tea baggers” ), have a president that ran as a “uniter and not divider ” and “post partisan” but has governed by attacking such groups as banks , insurance companies , big pharma, oil, wall street , US Chamber of Commerce , Fox News, John Boehner , traditional US allies like Great Britain and Israel , and engages in class warfare rhetoric based on resentment and envy of the worst kind . Is there any wonder why we have nearly 10% unemployment?

Where’s all the “Obama Lies ” hysteria ( and the New York Times editorial page) now that it’s been shown that Obama’s talk of shovel ready projects , lower health care costs ( remember “we’ll bend the cost curve”) , closing Guantanamo , rendition is illegal , making knowingly false charges against the Chamber of Commerce , etc. is all a bunch of lies and total distortion. Only Obama could resuscitate Bush ‘s approval ratings …

Give me a break….any wonder why ( with the exception of the “true believers” ) the vast majority of people are so disgusted with Obama and Democrats .

Finally , I’ve been listening to Tom Ashbrook since he first started on WBUR many years ago. I absolutely enjoy the program , contribute to WBUR and think Ashbrook is an incredibly gifted host . But anyone who thinks On Point doesn’t slant liberal obviously either doesn’t listen carefully or harbors such extremely left views that they can’t even recognize mainstream liberal comments. To those persons I would suggest you read/ listen to other points of view that you deem objectionable ( such as Fox News, Wall Street Journal , Commentary magazine , Rush Limbaugh , etc.) . It might even open your eyes.

“natural treasure” = national treasure.

NPR and PBS are both national treasures.

How F’d is this,

It is the biggest leak of military secrets in history. Al Jazeera has details of nearly 400,000 classified US documents. They are the secret Iraq files, leaked to whistleblower website WikiLeaks.

For the past ten weeks Al Jazeera has had complete access to those files. As part of our forthcoming coverage, we reveal how the US military gave a secret order not to investigate torture by Iraqi authorities discovered by American troops.

Our full coverage will begin on Friday, October 22, at 2100 GMT.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/10/20101022184243877818.html

So much for the moral high ground.

“Danial Schoor was one of the most biased and prejudicial reporters.”

Was Danial Schoor on MSNBC? was Danial Schoor an report or analyst? Williams was an reporter till his off the wall comments about Michelle Obama. Who was Schoor prejudiced too? Was Willams warn before about this?

Now answer is the Oreily Show an News program? If not than why is Williams on giving his Personal views with the title representing NPR? He could have always stated before each show how his views to do reflect the views of NPR but he didn’t and fox used him to put the myth of somehow balanced and fair.

I would bet if any NPR journalist or reporters started working and appearing on Keith O.(and said something like when i go to the south and see an white republican i get nervous they might be part of the kkk)the right would nearly crap themselves stating how NPR is ultra-liberal and should fire the person, yet when the same thing happens for Fox’s they see no problem with such

I see the real problem is demonizing blacks, jews, the poor, latinos can get you fired, demonizing muslims until now wouldn’t so Fox with there well oil machine sees this as a problem and want to keep (in the case of demonizing Muslims) still open to do so.

To keep there base they need sensationalism and fear, since demonizing blacks, latinos is weakening, and jews is off limits, the Russians are not an threat the easiest scapegoat are Muslims, but by firing Williams this has thrown an monkey wrench into there plans and may set a precedent for other news sources to do the same when such occurs so the astro outcry must be loud enough to try and scare NPR and other news sources not to.

[quote] That’s a good point. Hopefully the rest of us can see it for what it is and not get too entrenched in the dogma camps they have set up for us, and instead we can take back a bit of power and make some solid reforms that a vast majority of Americans can agree on after tearing down the status quo through reasoned and researched discussion. Hard to keep the noise down though. –Dave

[/quote]

Your ideas are noble and well reasoned.

But what if the dogma camps, as you put it, don’t come from anyone other than us? Would “taking back the power” suddenly result in all ordinary joes thinking the same way? Would taking back a bit of power result in every American citizens suddenly becoming a rational human being?

What if the reason Fox news is the favored source among conservatives is because conservative viewers tend to actually prefer media to be explicitly biased? If Fox news is merely brainwashing, then why do so many people love it?

What if your very idea of “reasoned and researched” conclusions is inherently a modern conception — where the research and rationality actually precede the conclusions, not the other way around — in some ways fundamentally foreign to the traditionalist mentality, one that is looking more for solid beliefs upon which he or she can rely? How can you expect someone who is longing for dogma and religion simply to give up this longing because rationality and science are offered to them as an alternative? Won’t they just see “rationality and science” as alternative dogmas (and not a particularly attractive ones at that)?

I can fully appreciate your caution against the idea that a political view can be objectively determined as “right”. But when do we get past this notion that things are either objectively true, or they are entirely relative and on equal footing and that nothing matters? Obviously there can be no political view that is objectively true, but can’t some political views be relatively more or less true than others? In our fear to acknowledge this, aren’t we inadvertently validating demagogues and hate mongers?

If Fox news and NPR are really just the same (only different in their underlying biases), then doesn’t that mean that Fox is just as real news as NPR? Isn’t this precisely what Juan Williams was suggesting by working both sides?

On Point producer(s),

Would you please consider doing an hour on the idea of “American Exceptionalism”?

1. Philiosophical underpinning
2. Effect on foreign policy
3. Ethical and moral considerations
4. Origin of the idea

Thank you for your consideration!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rZbvi6Tj6E&feature=related

NPR is the best broadcast news agency in the country. I think they’re second to none. Comparing them to CBS — say — or ABC seems fair. Comparing them to Fox News is absurd. Fox is to news what the WWF is to sport.

Conservatives:

Across the country your leaders are attempting to whip up another frenzy (for the same, see Jeremiah Wright frenzy, see birther frenzy, see mosque frenzy), this time against NPR.

I hope you will ask yourselves, “Why does Jim DeMint not want me to have commercial free, high quality news?”

Because you will admit — I’m certain — that NPR is superior to Fox.

So why don’t your leaders like it? What are they afraid of? Surely you can’t believe that DeMint and the bunch of them are just so incensed by the firing of Juan Williams that they are willing to defund NPR. Good people, think about it!

David –

You claim the news you are passing on is only being covered by that noble and legendary news outfit, Fox, but your link is to a NEWSPAPER. Is the Boston Herald a part of Fox?

Christopher,
I used the Boston Herald as a reference of the story being true. If I had just said Fox news, I knew I would get the answer I expected.
Our nation is in serious trouble, BOTH Dems and Repubs are at fault for this mess. Everyone here is trying to pass the blame and it is getting us nowhere.
No one here seems to care if NBC,CBS,ABC,MSNBS or CNN are biased to the hills in favor of the Dems.
I have listened to NPR for many years and I have noticed the slide more in the direction of liberal progressive politics.
Here is another site that tells a chilling truth, believe it are not, the facts are getting there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx7fNQcJAjs&feature=player_embedded

Posted by david, on October 24th, 2010 at 10:25 PM — “No one here seems to care if NBC,CBS,ABC,MSNBS or CNN are biased to the hills in favor of the Dems.”

Perhaps. Or perhaps anything short of Glen Beck seems “biased” toward the Dems, no?

Perhaps rational reporting is just inherently “biased toward the Dems . . .” just by virtue of it being rational? How else do you explain that so many people consider virtually every mainstream media outlet biased toward the Dems, no matter how hard they try to be objective, and the one station that consciously tries to lean the other way just doesn’t seem rational, objective, or even real news?

I’m sorry. I simply do not accept the endlessly repeated mantra that NPR is somehow in the tank for the liberal cause.

Do I think that there’s a liberal sway to some of the programming? Yes, I do. But I don’t see how that distorts news reporting. And when it does, NPR listeners have a variety of ways of redressing what they might see as unfair reporting. NPR reads letters from listeners on air; NPR funds dozens of local and national talk shows; NPR has online places like this one where people can debate.

The Fox Newsopia for which many of you yearn is a propaganda machine.

I challenge any of you to cite news stories on NPR that are “biased.”

I think that many of you interpret the coverage of certain kinds of subjects to be in itself liberally biased. Reporting — say — on poor air quality or polluted lakes, no matter how accurate the reporting, “reads” as liberal bias to many conservatives, presumably because conservatives would prefer to believe a free market’s invisible hand protects us from all bad things, including pollution.

“Maybe George wants to be King of world????

Did David every answer if Murdoch or Perry wants to maybe be king of the world like he stated for Soros they both given far more money than Soro’s has?