WTF, NPR fired Juan

[cuckold4u]

In my mind, Juan is right up there with Justice Thomas, Dick (oops I'm too chicken to go to Vietnam but I will gladly send the son and daughters to war) Cheney and the cherry on the cake George W Bush. On the congress side I most admire...here squeak of the closet door Mitch McConnell and his cloak room companion Lindsey (there are no gays in the military) Graham (oops think he is in the reserves). Before you judge, I served in the military and have smoked my share of pole...but incompetents and hypocrites...oh well guess I should get used to it...like thinking Fox news is really news.

[Randy4Candy]

.....are a great idea, right?

I mean, "everybody" KNOWS who's at fault whatever the particular source of any particular "fear" is *wink*wink*

The next plane that gets blown out of the air is on whatever caused security to be ineffective.

Fox panders and distorts as does MSNBC. But, which one is about turning everything over to the ultra rich and huge corporations? As things continue on the present course and it gets to the point where the 5% who control 90% of the wealth make their move towards economically enforcing indentured servitude on the other 95% then things will be corrected. Then, the fear and hate will actually be directed in a constructive direction.

[Roark]

This is all great drama, now where is the poontang?

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Williams began by telling O'Reilly that he was "right" in his view on Muslims. I don't think there's anything wrong with candidly admitting that he gets nervous when he sees Muslims on airplanes -- even though those feelings reflect some highly distorted thoughts -- as we all have irrational reactions to various situations. But Williams was not condemning his own reaction; to the contrary, he went on to justify it by saying that people who wear "Muslim garb" are "identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims," and that "the war with Muslims" (quoting Faisal Shahzad) is one of those "facts we can't get away from." All of those comments were prefaced with the standard defense of bigotry: "political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don't address reality." What "reality" are we supposedly all afraid to address? The full context makes clear that he is not only agreeing with O'Reilly's perspective on Muslims and Terrorism, but defending the linkage between the two.

Another columnist pointed out exactly the same thing:

The problem is that it's clear from the context that Williams wasn't merely confessing his own personal fears, he was reassuring O'Reilly that he was right to see all Muslims as potential terrorists. This is how he prefaced his remarks:

Well, actually, I hate to say this to you because I don't want to get your ego going. But I think you're right. I think, look, political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don't address reality.

The thing is, the idea that one should be afraid of anyone who "looks Muslim" isn't reality, it's silliness. He wasn't speaking some brave truth or making a personal confession, he was suggesting there's nothing wrong with looking at Muslims that way.

I'm sorry if muslim dress scares good ole Juan. If he had half a brain, he'd know that if there were a muslim terrorist on the plane whose intent was to blow it up, he'd be dressed as a normal citizen so as not to attract attention.

What an idiot. But I still don't think his idiocy was worth his job.

[Mokoa]

This is just yet another example of how liberals, claiming to be tolerant of all, are actually the most intolerant of all.

The blatant hypocrisy continues.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by Mokoa

This is just yet another example of how liberals, claiming to be tolerant of all, are actually the most intolerant of all.

The blatant hypocrisy continues.

I resent this broad-brush painting. I'm proud to be a liberal, but I still think Juan got screwed. Read my previous posts. As I said, I thought the same about Rick Sanchez.

I DO consider myself to be pretty tolerant.

And, when it comes to employment matters, I think companies should follow established HR policies. Only the grossest offense should result in a termination without previous warnings. These offenses by Sanchez and Williams should have resulted in written warnings, IMHO, and at the most, suspension w/o pay. Additional offenses could result in a firing. But to fire right out of the gate...not justified IMHO.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

Word! Oh and also not be funding this shit with tax money.

They do not get as much as people make them out to get. Although if you follow the money they get sponsorship from AMD which gets a huge chuck of their money in the form of government farm subsides (corn). One of those things that make ya huh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Public_Radio

Funding
NPR receives no direct funding from the federal government.[14] According to the 2009 financial statement, about 40% of NPR revenues come from the fees it charges member stations to receive programming. Typically, NPR member stations raise funds through on-air pledge drives, corporate underwriting, and grants from state governments, universities, and the CPB. In 2009, member stations derived 6% of their revenue from local funding and 10% of their revenue from the federal funding in the form of Corporation for Public Broadcasting grants.[15][16] About 1.5% of NPR's revenues come directly from Corporation for Public Broadcasting grants.
During the 1970s and early 1980s, the majority of NPR funding came from the federal government. Steps were taken during the 1980s to completely wean NPR from government support, but the 1983 funding crisis forced the network to make immediate changes. More money to fund the NPR network was raised from listeners, charitable foundations and corporations instead.[citation needed]

Originally Posted by Mokoa

This is just yet another example of how liberals, claiming to be tolerant of all, are actually the most intolerant of all.

The blatant hypocrisy continues.

Liberals are tolerant of shit they wanna be tolerant of just as conservatives. No more no less. They think they are more tolerant and you think you are more tolerant. It all depends on WTF we are talking about being tolerant about!

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

I heard the entire interview and can't believe he was fired. What I find amazing is TTH, et.al. who are saying he should be fired. What happened to the first amendment.

Freedom of Speech has always been a bedrock of this society. It sadens me to believe that anyone has devolved into a tyrancal group of pollitcally correct nazi's spewing hatred about anyone who dares speak openly. This incident shows the true bias the progressive media outlets promulgate. I've never been a Juan Williams fan, but you progressives have truly shown how intollerant you are and I will welcome Juan into the growing fold of conservatism.

Freedom of speech is a right held only against the government. Your employer can fire your because he doesn't like what you said. You girlfriend can leave you because she doesn't like what you said. You have a right to speak freely. You don't have a right not to suffer the consequences that your fellow citizens may inflict on you for your speech. If your a racist bigot -- an open member of the KKK, for example -- you should loose your job, your friends, and the respect of all that know you. Same with religious bigots.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Freedom of speech is a right held only against the government.

+1.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by pjorourke

Interesting that you just post liberal bloggers opinion as to what he said instead of going back and listing to him yourself. Isn't that hearsay counselor?

OK, show me the original transcript, and I'll argue off of it.

I just went to where I knew I could find actual quotes of what he said, instead of media reports. Greenwald is a lawyer and is always very careful to quote at length from people. Frankly, I don't watch any television news at all, and I listen to NPR about once every three months. So I didn't want to spend a lot of time writing about this shit. So I just went to find some quick, but lengthy quotes.

But to me, the real point is that real journalists need to quit treating Fox, MSNBC, and their ilk like they are real news networks. They aren't. They propaganda machines posing as news networks. Which is fine if that's what you like to watch. More power to you. But for a legitimate journalist to appear on either one and give it any legitimacy as a news organization is inexcusable and should be grounds for firing. Period.

[atlcomedy]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Freedom of speech is a right held only against the government. Your employer can fire your because he doesn't like what you said. You girlfriend can leave you because she doesn't like what you said. You have a right to speak freely. You don't have a right not to suffer the consequences that your fellow citizens may inflict on you for your speech. If your a racist bigot -- an open member of the KKK, for example -- you should loose your job, your friends, and the respect of all that know you. Same with religious bigots.

@ TTH - but then on the other hand you are the one that has argued if I want to run a restaurant (private establishment) that allows people to smoke that is not fair to non-smokers....

Let's play out "free speech" (hypothetically) - what if I run a small business and one of my employees* goes out and protests bans on gay marriage. He is a great employee by any other measure. Can I fire him just because I disagree with him?

Or what if I think MLK Jr. was a complete idiot and on MLK Day one of my employees* gives a speech praising him at a local luncheon. Can I fire him? (Implicit in my question is "without being subject to successful legal action on the part of the employee for some form of discrimination")

Again, with you and your ilk, it is all about freedom and access for people/positions you agree with....

*in both cases these are heterosexual white males....I'm not firing them because they are black or gay...I'm firing them because of their speech...

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

+1.

go figure

[DFW5Traveler]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Now that I've read what he said, he should have been fired. Here's Glenn Greenwald with the details. Anyone who not only admits to ethnic profiling, but then defends it as OK, ought to be fired from any workplace.

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

... Can I fire him just because I disagree with him?...

In TTH's warped view, yes it does. However, let's take your hypothetical further. If someone burns the flag is it ok to fire them? It's free fucking speach TTH and I'd bet you'd jump at the opportunity to pro-bono the wrongful term lawsuit of the asshole who burned the flag. Your shirt appears to be browning very nicely and your partisan BS is disturbing to say the least. As I've said before, it's still a free country and you are free to leave it TTH.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

OK, show me the original transcript, and I'll argue off of it.

I just went to where I knew I could find actual quotes of what he said, instead of media reports. Greenwald is a lawyer and is always very careful to quote at length from people. Frankly, I don't watch any television news at all, and I listen to NPR about once every three months. So I didn't want to spend a lot of time writing about this shit. So I just went to find some quick, but lengthy quotes.

Here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRwok2Ffoys

But to me, the real point is that real journalists need to quit treating Fox, MSNBC, and their ilk like they are real news networks. They aren't.

Well duh! FoxNews is no more a news network than ABC is. People like O'Reilly, Hannity, Beck would be the first to admit that they are OPINION shows -- not NEWS. Foxnews has a newscast -- just like NBC, CBS & ABC -- it used to be anchored by Brit Hume now it is Brett Baier. It runs from 6-6:30pm covering world news and politics and imo is as balanced or more balanced than the nets. They all have POV's which come through in their stories - Fox is rightish, the nets are leftish. That 30 minutes is followed by 30 minutes of opinion, analysis and discussion of the news that had just been reported (which is where Juan Williams usually appears). It is done in a panel discussion format -- always including at least one liberal. Their discussion is no different than what you would see on something like Meet the Press.

That 6pm show is followed by a one hour news broadcast anchored by Shepard Smith. His show is mainly general interest stuff like disasters and public interest -- I rarely watch it -- but it is news not opinion. That is then followed by an evening of opinion shows, which is entertainment just like Dancing With the Stars. During the course of the day, Fox News broadcasts about the same amount of hard news as NBC does. It is just that the Fox News network's entertainment portion is opinion shows. That is why folks like you always mis-characterize what they do.

[pjorourke]

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

@ TTH - but then on the other hand you are the one that has argued if I want to run a restaurant (private establishment) that allows people to smoke that is not fair to non-smokers....

TTH is being consistent. Allowing smoking or dissing Muslims are both acts that are not politically correct -- the ultimate sin in the Liberal credo.

[TexTushHog]

Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

In TTH's warped view, yes it does. However, let's take your hypothetical further. If someone burns the flag is it ok to fire them? It's free fucking speach TTH and I'd bet you'd jump at the opportunity to pro-bono the wrongful term lawsuit of the asshole who burned the flag. Your shirt appears to be browning very nicely and your partisan BS is disturbing to say the least. As I've said before, it's still a free country and you are free to leave it TTH.

You're nuts. If I represented the guy you fired, I'd only do it on an hourly basis. And frankly, I don't get paid enough on an hourly basis to tilt at windmills. He'd loose. You're free as a bird to fire him and if he chooses to burn the flag and you don't like it. The employee is free to burn the flag. But he's not free from the social consequences that follow (unless those consequences come from the government). I swear, the ignorance of the law on the part of Americans is startling.