Why NPR Was Right And Conservatives Are Still Wrong

Yesterday, NPR terminated the contract they had with Juan Williams for comments he made regarding Muslims. And I say they were right in doing so.

But while a publicly funded company has to take into consideration all of those that help them stay in business, conservatives are using this as proof that this is nothing more than PC culture run amok.

The standard conservative defense was implemented from the start: it's all about "context".

Does watching an entire segment and hearing remarks in context also conflict with NPR’s editorial standards and practices? The Right Scoop has the entire six-minute-plus segment, and do what NPR failed to do — watch the whole thing

OK, let's watch.....



It's pretty clear what Williams is doing, which is precisely what he always does when he appears on Fox"News" - play both sides against the middle. He's being quite clear and up front with how he feels and then plays the "balance" roll in saying that people should act completely opposite from how he does in order to resolve a particular situation.

He's done this for years and I've always known that this was bound to happen.

But conservatives didn't stop there. Michelle Malkin George Soros into the "debate" in hopes to further the narrative that this was somehow his doing:

Reminder of George Soros’s NPR cash infusion this week:

NPR has received a $1.8 million grant from the Open Society Foundations to begin a project called Impact of Government that is intended to add at least 100 journalists at NPR member radio stations in all 50 states over the next three years.

Anyone can see that the initiatives that Open Society takes up are indeed contrary to those of the modern conservatives movement. After all, ensuring that the playing field is leveled for people all around the world, that health, wellness, and equal justice are benefits we all can enjoy simply doesn't blend well with the conservative narrative of "I before we". I suppose that "We the people...." only operates in certain instances. But I'm getting off track here.

Malkin also goes on to tie in an incident that had nothing to do with NPR:

Worth noting: NPR affiliate employee Sarah Spitz at public radio station KCRW wishes death on Rush Limbaugh…not a firing offense.

And while Sarah Spitz's comments towards Limbaugh do nothing but make her look like the multitude of conservatives that wish ill of Barack Obama, she was never in the employ of NPR.

....Spitz has never been an NPR employee. For many years, she has worked for KCRW, a public radio station in Santa Monica, California, as a producer and publicist.

KCRW is one of some 900 independently-operated public radio stations across the country that air NPR's news, talk and entertainment programming. Like network TV affiliates, they air national programming but act autonomously.

Not to delve too deeply into the "what if..." realm that conservatives all too often live in, but had this decision been made by a private company, it's likely that this would have been a much smaller story about who did the firing and more about the white-washing of Islamaphobia and the victimhood status of a Fox"News" employee.

The spin has been going full steam since news broke that Williams was terminated.



I'm guessing that Bill O'Reilly doesn't listen to NPR, based on his characterization of the organization. What Bill is really saying is that since NPR isn't like Fox"News" that that is what makes them an evil, liberal, propaganda outfit.

One last "what if...." point of reference that should put this into perspective.

What Williams did is essentially the same as saying that when you go to grocery store and see a black family, you're immediately going to assume that they are going to buy up all the watermelon and chicken and pay for it with food stamps. It's the same thing, and it's just as wrong.

To reiterate, NPR is an organization that is funded by people all over America and the world. They have to take into consideration their entire donor base when presenting news stories and allowing all voices to be heard. If you take just a few hours each week to listen to NPR, you're going to hear more "balance" to their programming than Fox could even pretend to muster over an entire year.

I don't feel sorry for Williams in the least. He is an example of what "accountability" is all about. I'm sure that he will be able to churn out at least one other book and lots of airtime on Fox"News" to milk and contort this story so that the modern conservative movement can further demonize anyone that doesn't follow Fox's narrative about what America is and isn't.

The Give And Take Of Conservativism

This is simply amazing............



So "great Americans" should give up their rights when the "need" presents itself?

Actually, this doesn't surprise me, as this country was taken over by white puritans that demanded that the Native Americans give up the right to their "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

Does this mean that Gays can be "Great Americans" if they give up the ability to marry someone they love?

Does this mean that a family that has lost a son, a brother, a father, mother, or daughter in Iraq or Afghanistan must give up their right to voice opposition to The Westboro Baptist Church openly and hysterically protesting their loss?

Should I go on?

Parallels Between Radical Muslims And Teabaggers

It seems that neither are capable of understanding or accepting satire.

This piece of animation seems to have stirred up some serious outrage amongst members of the tea-bagger movement:



NPR's "Political Junkie" Ken Rudin shed some light on how this was amped-up by a man who is no stranger to having his stories linked with death-threats: Bill O'Reilly.

Bill O'Reilly, host of the fair and balanced O'Reilly Factor on Fox News, was, as he often is, exercised by something to do with NPR. In this particular case -- which aired yesterday -- he was displeased with a cartoon on the NPR Web site by independent syndicated columnist Mark Fiore entitled "Learn to Speak Tea Bag." (Fiore's cartoons have appeared on our Web site in the past.) I hadn't previously seen the Tea Bag cartoon, or any of his stuff, but I've watched it now. (For the record, it appeared back in November.) In my view, this particular cartoon was not especially funny, clever or subtle -- certainly not subtle. But it is, after all, labeled "opinion," and there's no mistaking that's what it is. The NPR Web site, for anyone who has looked at it, includes opinion from the left and right, and shades in between. That's why it's a must-see every day.

The death threats leveled against Mark Fiore remind me quite a bit of death threats against the Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard who depicted the Prophet Muhammad with a bomb in his turban. The only difference between that story and this one is that conservatives rallied to defend Westergaard.

The loudest voice was that of Michelle Malkin.

How about kicking off the New Year with a stark reminder that jihadists don’t just hate us because of Iraq and Afghanistan? The Religion of Perpetual Outrage hates all infidels. The targeting of the Danish Mohammed cartoonists is a lingering pretext to demonstrate that centuries-old, Koran-inspired hatred. If it isn’t cartoons, it’s always something else. From fresco rage to book rage to film rage to beauty pageant rage to Koran-dropping rage to cartoon rage to Pope rage, to ceramic Mohammed bobbleheads, it never ends.

Keep all that in mind as you read the latest on the attack against Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard

I wonder what she has to say about the "tea-bagger" piece from Fiore? As of right now, there's nothing on her site about this, but considering that those that refer to Malkin as "The Boss" have already tackled this from the "your tax dollars hard at work" angle, I'm pretty sure they are going to say away from the death-threat issue right now until they can find a sufficient way to spin it.

Fiore seems to be taking this all in stride as he responds to the complaints and threats on his site:

“Learn to Speak Tea Bag” ran on my usual client sites, including NPR, which really set off the guys over here, here (note Condi giving child flowers down by "donate" button), here, here and here. Before you could say, “due to a pre-existing condition, your health coverage has been denied,” there was a full-fledged viral campaign by right-wing media outlets and blogs to jump, scream and shout about this animation. Which, to me, is just great!

I say that not because I get some thrill out of receiving emails that are in all capital letters or have more exclamation points than letters in the alphabet, I say that because one of the most important functions of a political cartoon, or political animation, is to foster a discussion. With thousands of comments posted, loads of emails and tweets, discussion was definitely fostered, and then some. It’s the “then some” that worries me.

This cartoon, as reported by greendem over at DailyKos, has drawn the ire and outrage of the good people over at Brietbart's "BigGovernemnt". Considering Andrew's continual spots on Fox"News" after the ACORN affair, I'm sure that we'll be hearing more about this cartoon on America's "fair and balanced" network.

The tea party movement seems to perpetually be in the cross hairs of the Left’s most insidious propaganda artists. A post on taxpayer subsidized NPR’s blog that’s getting some attention this week features a video by Mark Fiore entitled “Learn to Speak Tea Bag.” The cartoon gives mock step-by-step instructions on what Fiore believes is the modus operandi of tea party activists. Fiore unintentionally serves up a nearly all-inclusive package on all that is dishonest and malicious about the Left’s continued campaign to discredit this wildly popular grassroots force.

Fiore’s isn’t the first and likely won’t be the last tea party hit job. Everyone from the President to “mainstream” media commentators have joined in since the movement’s inception in February 2009. This multifaceted attack on the tea party movement has revealed an interesting trend that mirrors the evolving tactics of a maladjusted, intellectual deficient schoolboy bully.

I'm still trying to figure out why conservatives are thinking this was a piece contracted by NPR. Fiore explains on his site that this was used by multiple sources. After all, Fox"News" has Mara Liason and Juan Williams on their payroll as well, so there's quite the double-standard happening here.

The thin-skinned nature of conservatives shows that they have little ability to respond to situations without resorting to extremes. People like Ann Coulter talk about the eternal "victimhood" status of Liberals/Progressives, but that seems to be more projection than anything else. Is the rage emanating from the modern conservative movement indicative of their lack of creativity, sense of humor, or is it something much more substantive - that they know they'll never be able to win an argument considering their perspective is so skewed and not framed within the reality of our times?

If Bachman Were A Member Of Flock Of Seagulls

Meet Lynne Torgerson.



Call her "Bachman part II" and you're not too far off. Having decided to throw her hat back into the ring for a second chance at holding political office, Torgerson is constructing her platform primarily on anti-Muslim sentiment and attempting to show that Rep. Kieth Ellison is a radical that can't be trusted.

Torgerson said she won’t seek endorsement by a political party this time around. (Barb Davis White, who challenged Ellison last year as the Republican endorsee, will again attempt to unseat him next year.) That’s partly why she describes herself as a “stateswoman,” rather than as a “politician” — the kind of candidate who she says too often toes a party line rather than stands for deeply held principles.

Her views on Islam dominate the “Issues” page at her new campaign website, but they weren’t what Republican and Independence party officials remembered about her when MnIndy asked.

She'll likely make a big splash with the teabaggers in her area, but her willingness to be both unblushingly discriminatory AND ignorant don't speak well of her as a person nor as an American. Couple that with the fact that she does appear to be fashioning herself after Michelle Bachman and it doesn't speak well of women politicians in Minnesota in general.

Admittedly, Torgerson knows little to nothing about Muslim faith and sees that discrimination against those that practice Islam is just fine, as she sees it as more of an "ideology" than a religion.

Perhaps she should take a second look at the Bible she apparently loves so dearly and then rethink her position.

The Pieces Don't Seem To Fit

There’s this inescapable feeling that has rattled around in my brain since the tragic Ft. Hood shootings last week – the “facts” don’t seem to make much sense.

Considering all that we are being told about Hassan, it all seems to be far too atypical, much too predictable of a portrait of a radicalized Muslim. Almost like his character traits are being created as each daily news cycle starts.

The questions that I have only multiply with each day. If the FBI was monitoring Hassan for at least 6 months, were they simply waiting for something like this to happen before acting? Federal agents have been known to do this and have even gone so far as to actively provoke reaction from those under investigation. We saw this earlier in the year in New York several Muslim men were sold weapons by undercover agents. Was the Ft. Hood situation escalated by this type of action by the FBI? Who’s to say yes or no?

But the claim made this morning by the media that Hassan was “connected” to the Sept. 11th hijackers makes this whole scenario even more difficult to swallow. Perhaps it’s the overuse of 9/11 as a catalyst to push a certain message, ideal, or excuse the actions of specific law enforcement personnel. The connection, if true, is loose at best. Hassan was alleged to have attended the same mosque as some of the Sept. 11th hijackers. But the story is being framed ( primarily by Fox ) that he had direct communications with the men who ultimately carried out the attacks on Sept. 11th.

Even within 24 hours of the shooting, where news reports showed that this was the act of one man, I found it extremely difficult to accept the fact that Hassan was able to wound 29 people and kill 13 with two handguns. Even in a target rich environment like thE processing center where the incident took place, one would have to expect multiple reloads and that those there wouldn’t simply sit and wait to be shot.

The variables, the nuance within this story, doesn’t really lend itself to the neatly wrapped package that some within the media are attempting to deliver to us.

Were there other shooters? What did he really say prior to shooting? Was Hassan carrying out orders from Al Queda? There’s been more speculation than actual delivery of facts from the media in regards to all of this.

And NPR has reported this morning that Hassan, since having his ventilator removed, has been able to speak. But what he is saying is not being reported, so as to preserve the integrity of the investigation.

And preserving that integrity is something that the conservative Right is willing to ignore. The Right needs for this to be about Al Qeada. They need for this to be about PC culture, that people are too afraid to confront someone that could potentially harm others simply because it's not the "proper" thing to do. Unfortunately, this story is not as simple as that.

I'm reminded of a scene from the film Arlington Road, where Jeff Bridges character speaks with his class about terrorism and the need for Americans to have a face, a name, to associate with horrific incidences.

By and large, our consumerist nature makes us act in very odd and reflexive ways. If we are presented a specific set of symbols, then we are moved to act in specific ways. Since Sept. 11th, 2001 many within the country have seen the actions - benign or not - by Muslims as motivated by abject hatred of America and all that the country stands for. This has resulted in a glut of stories - primarily pushed by conservative media outlets - that create the illusion that the country is continually under siege by Muslim extremists.

There is no excusing what Hassan has done, it was a horrible day and an equally horrible incident. But one can't help but feel like some of the "facts" surrounding this case are being manufactured in order to illicit a specific response.

It's Called A Lie

It's one thing to take a person's complete statement and attempt to create this alternate reality where it means something completely different. This example, from master of conservatve disinformation - Sean Hannity, isn't "spin" at all - it's a bold-faced lie.



And I have to ask, why does anyone believe anything this man says?