In the wake of NPR's firing of contributor Juan Williams over comments about Muslims, Mike Huckabee is calling on the next Congress to cut the radio network's funding when it convenes next year.
"NPR has discredited itself as a forum for free speech and a protection of the First Amendment rights of all and has solidified itself as the purveyor of politically correct pabulum and protector of views that lean left," Huckabee said in a statement provided to CNN.
Williams told Fox News host Bill O'Reilly on Monday that he gets "worried" and "nervous" on flights when he sees people wearing "Muslim garb." NPR terminated Williams' contract on Wednesday evening.
Huckabee said he "will no longer accept interview requests from NPR as long as they are going to practice a form of censorship, and since NPR is funded with public funds, it is a form of censorship."
I've never been a big fan of Gov. Huckabee, but he has it right here. I can only hope this acts as an additional rallying cry for centrists and conservatives as they go to the polls in a couple of weeks.
Really, I have just had it. I hope the Democrats get their asses handed to them in November. I'm tired of having to listen to the inanities of under-educated nitwits like Steve Benen who labor continuously under the misapprehension that they somehow constitute an "elite" who ought to be listened to. Listen up folks; you are not an elite. Real elites don't have "credentials," they have actual intellectual abilities; real elites just don't say they want a free exchange of ideas, they actually allow for such a free exchange without the threat of punishment for deviating from some preordained orthodoxy; real elites are smart enough to recognize the issues that matter to them may not be the same as what matters to people who actually work for a living; a real elite doesn't act as if their status as elites was dependent upon denigrating those who work for a living when they disagree with you; basically, a real elite would be everything the chattering left of today is not.
4 comments:
"NPR rejects The Constitution and it's [sic] protections, specifically because NPR favors some Americans over others...thus I believe American have the right, or duty, to reject NPR."
Huh? Does the Constitution require that newspapers, tv networks, radio stations, etc., keep people on the payroll who engage in bigotry? How about Holocaust-denial? Using the n-word repeatedly? Being a Truther or a Brither? Wow, that Constitution really is powerful, trumping the right of business owners to control the content on their tv shows, radio programs, and newspapers.
(Where exactly does the Constitution prohibit a corporation from dismissing employees for saying inappropriate things?)
Of course, in the real world Juan Williams has a right to engage in anti-Muslim bigotry, but NPR does not have to keep writing him checks -- that's what Fox, the Wall St. Journal, etc. are for!
If you really believe in that mysterious provision of the Constitution, then I suppose you must think that it also applies to CNN vis-a-vis Rick Sanchez and Octavia Nasr, McClatchey vis-a-vis Helen Thomas, the U. of Colorado and Ward Churchill, etc.?
Or do you only support the retention of anti-Mulism bigots and think that anti-Semetic bigots should be fired the Constitution's mystery provision be damned?
I love Conservatives who only favor freedom of expression for "some Americans over others" and I believe that proper civil libertarians have "the right, or duty, to reject" such selective advocacy of civil liberties.
Bullshit, and intellectually dishonest bullshit as well. This doesn't have anything to do with what Williams said, and it certainly didn't have anything to do with "bigotry."
For starters, let's look at the definition of the word: "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own." Any sane reading (or hearing) of Williams' words concerning an emotional reaction to Islamic garb followed by actually thinking about what he was feeling shows it has nothing to do with "bigotry" as it doesn't fit the definition. Not that that will matter to lefties for whom everything depends on what your defintion of is is. (Well, when they need it that way.)
But, of course, this never had anything to do with what he said but where he said it (as the NPR CEO even admitted in a roundabout way.)
So, sure, Williams remark about a passing emotive reaction is the same as Thomas telling Jews to go back to the land of the Holocaust, or Sanchez offering up a 21st Century version of the Protocols of Zion - complete with shadowy cabals of Jews pulling strings behind the scenes. Give me a fucking break, and grow the hell up.
Any, yes, because NPR is supposed to be "Public" radio, that should ethically require them to adhere to the Constitution in a way Newsweek, or The New York Times, or MSNBC, or (horror of horrors!) even Fox News does not have to.
Typical of you leftist ass hats is this fool who writes of Thomas:
"Helen Thomas was fired, in what was a clear violation of her First Amendment Rights; but none of our major media or professors of Constitutional Law screamed in her defense, because she spoke the truth about the "Sacred Cow" of American politics -- Israel, and Israel's abuse of Palestinians."
And then writes of Williams:
"Williams was clearly a 'company man' for the perspective of the Washington Post; not truly a reporter who wanted to know much about the plight of blacks other than himself. Some would label him an 'Uncle Tom,' or 'oreo' and that he was then -- and it shows clearly he is now -- as he falls back on the 'race card.'"
And that was Williams unpardonable crime...not being doctrinaire leftist enough. That sounds like about all the left has these days. Its a shame the left has become such a disgusting racist parody of its former self.
You are very classy. Calling people names who disagree with you.
You still don't explain how the Constitution -- I suppose you mean the First Amendment -- applies in the case of NPR. Of course, it does not. That's why only "ass hats" (your term not mine) make such an argument. I love it when conservatives whine about the Constitution without bothering to actually read it -- it's only 8,000 words or so -- or look into the relevant case law. All too typical of "Constitutional conservatives."
The rest of your post is much too silly to respond to. It is impossible to take such nonsense seriously. I suppose I'll go listen to Rush Limbaugh playing the "Barack the Magic Negro" song to soothe my nerves. Now there's a man who really does not hide from his overpowering racism and his millions of listeners love him for it.
Once again, bullshit. This began with you calling Williams an "anti-Muslim bigot." So it started as a name calling excercise. For too many years the left has gotten by with using the cry of "racist!" or "sexist" (or whatever -ist) in lieu of actual intellectual argument. Charles Murray? "Racist!" Clarence Thomas? "Uncle Tom!" Larry Summers? "Sexist!" And for too damn long Democrats have allowed this intellectual idiocy to pass without criticism because they deemed lefty types to be "on our side."
And don't give me that intelelctually dishonest bullshit about the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't say you can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, so does that mean you can? Of course not. CPB's quasi-governmental standing alone makes a case that they need to follow the Constitution. (Just as private universities do if any of their student get Federal loan money.)
Besides, it is very clear NPR has violated the terms of the 1967 incoporation act for public broadcasting:
"Except as provided in the second sentence of subsection (c)(1) of this section, no political test or qualification shall be used in selecting, appointing, promoting, or taking other personnel actions with respect to officers, agents, and employees of the Corporation."
I'm sorry, but having a "PC Code" is a political test. If you have a problem with that take it up with the Supreme Court who have struck down every PC Speech Code that has come its way.
Why did they strike them down? BEcause they violated the First Amendment.
Post a Comment