bigdaddy2003;528578 wrote:I was flipping through the channels last night and caught a bit of Maddow's show. She was spewing some garbage about how being is a bigot is a requirement to work at Fox. She said that because of Juan receiving a new contract. What a stupid statement.
BGFalcons82;528580 wrote:And your expectations of her are....
cbus4life;528786 wrote: If you were being sarcastic, well played.
ptown_trojans_1;529406 wrote:NPR is, as expected and as it should, getting a lot of negative reactions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/22/AR2010102206616.html?wpisrc=nl_headline
BGFalcons82;530533 wrote:The elites are always asking what specific cuts the Republicans would make should they win next Tuesday. Pretty sure NPR Radio is on the list to be de-funded. They should join Air America shortly thereafter.
Elites = ruling class in Washington. Doesn't matter if they're a D or an R. Most of the current Congressional Elites are D's, but people like Lindsey Graham fall into this class.cbus4life;530951 wrote:The elites?
And, while i agree that NPR is a joke, at the moment, if one of the first things the Republicans tackle is de-funding NPR...they should be laughed out of D.C. just as fast as their democratic counterparts are at the moment...it should be addressed, but their funding is such a drop-in-the-bucket that it should be addressed after things like ObamaCare, etc., have been taken care of. And, that is why i'm not terribly upset with Republicans regaining control, i want the health care bill scrapped.
But, if they use the NPR debacle to get the base fired up without doing anything that will actually make a difference, immediately, then i will not be pleased.
NPR will get what is coming to them...but for the love of God, move on to more important things with the momentum you'll gain from these elections.
Are you talking about all the angry white males that are upset and defending a black male for getting fired for political reasons?redfalcon;531736 wrote:Seriously, any mention of NPR by republicans (or dems) will cease on November 3rd. It is another political trick to pick up the angry white man vote.
What about these insensitive and way out of line remarks?redfalcon;531736 wrote:As for Williams comment, it is insensitive and way out of line for anyone, but especially for a journalist, and NPR definitely made the correct choice here. He is free to express his opinions, but not when he is a part of the face of a very reputable media outlet and is expected (and required by his job description) to remain neutral.
You can't have it both ways. Racist, stereotypical, and bigoted remarks are just that...regardless of the context or the words chosen.I Wear Pants;531768 wrote:Not the same type of comment IMO. These Muslims in question on the plane aren't doing anything that could be construed as wrong or taunting. In the quote you posted the person who said it believed that there were racially charged signs (which may or may not have been I don't know what signs he's talking about) being held at rallys of a certain group. Had he said "the Tea partiers all dress like rednecks so I feel insecure and nervous around them" or something then it'd be comparable.
This. NPR is an ass-pimple in the scheme of things. This story will be gone by next Wednesday morning, if not earlier.cbus4life;530951 wrote:The elites?
And, while i agree that NPR is a joke, at the moment, if one of the first things the Republicans tackle is de-funding NPR...they should be laughed out of D.C. just as fast as their democratic counterparts are at the moment...it should be addressed, but their funding is such a drop-in-the-bucket that it should be addressed after things like ObamaCare, etc., have been taken care of. And, that is why i'm not terribly upset with Republicans regaining control, i want the health care bill scrapped.
But, if they use the NPR debacle to get the base fired up without doing anything that will actually make a difference, immediately, then i will not be pleased.
NPR will get what is coming to them...but for the love of God, move on to more important things with the momentum you'll gain from these elections.
The First Amendment doesn't mean you can't get fired for saying something stupid. I'm allowed calling my boss a wanker but I can still get fired for it.believer;531779 wrote:You can't have it both ways. Racist, stereotypical, and bigoted remarks are just that...regardless of the context or the words chosen.
Can you imagine what the "mainstream" media would have done with the comment, “You have to say to yourself, why is this group so overwhelmingly of one color in such a diverse country?” had those words come out of the mouth of - say - Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Glenn Beck if they were commenting on a Black Panther pep rally?
The difference here is that I defend Williams's First Amendment right to say whatever he wants to say. Leftist organizations partially funded by our tax dollars like NPR definitely ought to do the same.
I Wear Pants;531711 wrote:Palin is apparently calling for the funding of NPR to be cut because of this. Much more stupid than the firing IMO.
-- NPR issued an apology in 2005 for a commentator's remark on the return of Christ following a complaint by the Christian Coalition that the comment was anti-Christian.
On "All Things Considered," the network's afternoon drive-time program, humorist Andrei Codrescu said that the "evaporation of 4 million [people] who believe" in the doctrine of Rapture "would leave the world a better place."
Codrescu, who was on contract with NPR but not a full-time employee, later told The Associated Press he was sorry for the language, but "not for what [he] said."
NPR apologized for the comment, saying, it "crossed a line of taste and tolerance" and was an inappropriate attempt at humor.
-- Also in 2005, NPR apologized to Mark Levin, author of "Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America," after a broadcast of its program "Day to Day" falsely accused him of advocating violence against judges. Levin accepted the apology, but said the broadcast was "illustrative of a smear campaign launched by the Left to try and silence" his criticisms of judicial activism.
-- In 2002, the head of NPR issued an apology six months after a report linking anthrax-laced letters to a Christian conservative organization.
-- Also in 2002, during an interview with the Philadelphia City Paper, NPR host Tavis Smiley said he strived to do a show that is "authentically black," but not "too black."
-- In 1995, Nina Totenberg, NPR's award-winning legal affairs correspondent, was allowed to keep her job after telling the host of PBS' "Inside Washington" that if there was "retributive justice" in the world, former North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms would "get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it."
fish82;532052 wrote:This. NPR is an ass-pimple in the scheme of things. This story will be gone by next Wednesday morning, if not earlier.
If you can't find something that you like on NPR you don't like anything.jmog;532237 wrote:Why would the US taxpayers send money to a far left wing organization? Should the government send money to Rush Limbaugh too to make it even?
There are PLENTY of things to like on NPR....if you lean to the left just a little. NPR gets the best of both worlds. They pretend as if they aren't influenced by corporate sponsorship by coyly saying in a stoic monotone voice, "And this program is funded by Merrill Lynch" but then get the added revenue benefit of tax dollars from their liberal pals on Capitol Hill. No other network gets that "advantage."I Wear Pants;532377 wrote:If you can't find something that you like on NPR you don't like anything.