home

Has NPR Been Thrown Into The Briar Patch?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 08:56:56 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

LATimes media critic:

To assure its listeners that this is something more than a careless one-off or the political act its adversaries claim, NPR has two choices: Apply the "Williams standard" across the board and force all its commentators off of opinion-laden cable TV or rewrite its ethics guidelines to recognize the new media landscape where opinion-making is the coin of the land.

Can Mara Liasson, a full-time NPR employee and chief political reporter for the network, continue as a Fox News contributor? Earlier this month she seemed to be offering an opinion when she suggested to news anchor Bret Baier that President Obama needs to be careful to put "the economy No. 1 at all times."

(Emphasis supplied.) Let me get this straight, to "fix this problem," NPR has to sack Mara Liasson, Cokie Roberts, David Brooks, et al. (sorry to see E.J.Dionne go, but what the heck)? Talk about getting thrown in the briar patch. NPR's fundraising would skyrocket and significantly improve the quality of its programming. All in the name of "doing penance" for canning Juan Williams. A win-win. Though Mara Liasson would be pissed - no $2 million "protection" for you, Mara!

Speaking for me only

< A HAMP "Success" Story | Friday Morning Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Has NPR Been Thrown Into The Briar Patch? | 58 comments (58 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Mara (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:02:56 AM EST
    should have gone first

    Mara Liasson...... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by mogal on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:50:05 AM EST
     was on The Week That Was back when Bill Clinton was running for his second term.  I never will forget what she said because it caused me to stop watching all the "talk" shows.  She said that the press had turned on Bill because he spent so much time talking to people in the rope lines and didn't have time for them.
    Can you imagine a President who actually liked people and wanted to talk to ordinary people?  The shame!  I wanted to cry.


    Parent
    After postng above I ran across this from the WP (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by mogal on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:09:54 AM EST
    He [Clinton]is just baffled and bewildered about why there has not been a more coherent message talking about what the party has done, why we allowed ourselves to become human pinatas," McAuliffe said. "I think he is agitated that Democrats haven't put their best foot forward in explaining to the American public what they've actually done." ...
    Pres. Obama doesn't like retail politics.

    FPOTUS Bill Clinton thrives on it.

    After every speech, he flings off his suit jacket and works the crowd. He wraps his arms around folks and listens for cues about what ails America. (source


    Parent

    Very perceptive, mogal (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by christinep on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 03:22:52 PM EST
    It also says something about introverts and extroverts...and the mirror challenges they both face.

    Parent
    But if what you say is true, then why hasn't (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Buckeye on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:30:04 AM EST
    NPR sacked these people already?

    If sacking these people would mean "NPR's fundraising would skyrocket and significantly improve the quality of its programming" then why haven't they done it?

    Unless NPR is completely imcompetent, they must have these people on their payroll for a reason that benefits them.

    Sacking them NOW (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:32:40 AM EST
    helps the fundraising.

    Standing up to Fox!

    And of course they are incompetent.They aren't going to do it. They'll probably hire Williams back.

    Parent

    Heh heh...Draperesque! n/t (none / 0) (#11)
    by lilburro on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:36:13 AM EST


    Parent
    the will hire him back (none / 0) (#12)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:36:49 AM EST
    thats what I was thinking.  I really hope they do not.

    Parent
    I don't remember you being so passionate (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Harry Saxon on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:46:42 AM EST
    when Helen Thomas was fired for what she said about Israel, Slado, so your charge of hypocracy is in itself hypocritical.

    I could care less that Juan was fired (none / 0) (#28)
    by Slado on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:54:25 AM EST
    I am enjoying the equal partisan echo chambers clamoring away at full bore.

    Remember if you make the hypocrite argument you are essentially agreeing that you are one yourself.

    I like Obama howerver am above the fray.

    Some would argue, not me because Im indifferent, that what Helen Thomas said was more offensive, some would not.

    I have no opinion on the Helen Thomas firing because I never read any of her work and only knew about her from her spats on the front row with presidents.

    Juan was canned because NPR hates Fox News.   NPR in my view can fire who they want to but liberals should be careful when they bend over backwards to make excuses for NPR when none are needed.

    Parent

    Re:Bore (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by Harry Saxon on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:27:10 AM EST

    Remember if you make the hypocrite argument you are essentially agreeing that you are one yourself.

    No, I thought that what was done to Helen Thomas and Ms. Nasr was wrong, but then, unlike your suggestions here, I judge each case on it's merits, not take a broad view because of the side I happen to espouse.

    That's called intellectual consistency, a concept you seem unfamiliar with.

    I like Obama howerver am above the fray.

    And I'm the Sultan of Brunei.

    Some would argue, not me because Im indifferent, that what Helen Thomas said was more offensive, some would not.

    And if wishes were horses, all would ride.

    I have no opinion on the Helen Thomas firing because I never read any of her work and only knew about her from her spats on the front row with presidents.

    In journalism, this is known as burying the lead.

    Juan was canned because NPR hates Fox News.   NPR in my view can fire who they want to but liberals should be careful when they bend over backwards to make excuses for NPR when none are needed.

    And who is making excuses for liberals doing so here?

    Next thing you'll be telling us that you think Fox News is fair and balanced.

    Being disingenuous doesn't suit you, smug conservatism is more your style.

    Parent

    You are doing a lot of assuming (none / 0) (#39)
    by Slado on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:55:43 AM EST
    If you however read a post of mine in this very same thread you would realize I say all media is biased.

    Again, I am otherworldly like our president and don't expect you do keep up with my 12 dimensional chess game.

    Sarcasm, intended.

    Parent

    Whatever your views of the media (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Harry Saxon on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 12:00:43 PM EST
    If you however read a post of mine in this very same thread you would realize I say all media is biased.

    Sarah Palin makes the same claim when she uses the term Lamestream Media, so your point is?

    Again, I am otherworldly like our president and don't expect you do keep up with my 12 dimensional chess game.

    Sarcasm, intended.

    Whatever you do, don't quit your day job.

    Parent

    Applying standards across the board. (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:46:49 AM EST
    How well has the LA media critic, the ladies from The View, Lou Dobbs, Eugene Robinson, Huckabee etc. applied these standards themselves? Did they express the same outrage in all circumstances? From Glenn Greenwald:

    For those objecting to Williams' firing as some sort of oppressive act of PC censorship:  in addition to wanting to know whether you also objected to CNN's firing of Nasr and Sanchez, and to Thomas' forced "retirement," I'd also like to know what you did to protest CNN's firing of executive Eason Jordan in 2004 for observing -- correctly -- that the U.S. military had repeatedly attacked war journalists; and CNN's 2003 firing of Peter Arnett for criticizing the Iraq War; and MSNBC's demotion and firing of Ashleigh Banfield after criticizing media coverage of American wars, or the same network's firing of Phil Donahue for being too anti-war; or, for that matter, the University of Colorado's dismissal of Ward Churchill for arguing that the World Trade Center was a legitimate target to retaliate against American foreign policy.  If you only object to speech-based firings when you agree with the ideas being expressed, then you don't actually believe in the principles you claim to support. link
    I didn;t care much about those (none / 0) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:57:32 AM EST
    and I don't care much about this one either.

    Parent
    Consistancy on your part, (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:25:01 AM EST
    others not so much.

    Examples of people outraged by Williams being fired who called for firing people in the recent past for similar media statements are contained in this post at TPM.

    Karl Rove was on Fox News today, and said of NPR: "It doesn't deserve a dime of the people's money and it's been increasingly left wing, and now it's gone completely cuckoo crazy politically correct. Shame on them for having taken this man who worked for them for 10 years and fired by a phone call."

    Rove said of Helen Thomas's comments in June: This was a "typical, bile-filled remark that she has increasingly tended to in recent decades. I think the Hearst papers did the right thing by cashiering her."

    Bill O'Reilly decried the Williams firing on Fox News today, calling it "outrageous." He continued:

        As Woody Allen once said, this is a travesty of a mockery of a sham. But it's not out of character for NPR -- they've been trying to get rid of Juan for a while because Juan is associated with the Fox News channel and NPR is -- it's not a news organization. It's basically a left wing outfit that wants one opinion.

    Just a few weeks ago, O'Reilly defended CNN's decision to fire Rick Sanchez, since the network "sells their credibility as a hard news organization" and Sanchez "is supposedly representing CNN."



    Parent
    Karl Rove is such a knee jerk (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:34:13 AM EST
    drama queen these days.  I'm sending him a feather boa for Christmas, he might as well look the part too.

    Parent
    Go aheand and cut them off, Karl (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by DFLer on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:33:25 AM EST
    NPR receives no direct federal money for its operations, but between 1 percent and 3 percent of its $160 million budget comes from grants awarded by publicly funded entities such as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the National Endowment for the Arts.

    strib

    Parent

    What I love (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by lilburro on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:58:08 AM EST
    about this is that people point to the "full context"...as if that was ever important to Fox News before (and surely after).

    I must admit (5.00 / 4) (#21)
    by lentinel on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:07:43 AM EST
    that I would enjoy seeing Cokie Roberts given her walking papers.

    I will never forget when (on ABC) she referred to Barbara Bush as someone who was "be-lov-ed" (three syllables).

    I'm still reeling from that one.

    Williams warned before... (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by DFLer on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:37:34 AM EST
    Dana Davis Rehm, NPR's senior vice president for communications, said Williams -- who was not a commentator or columnist for NPR -- had been warned in the past for comments that violated ethics guidelines that prohibits NPR journalists from participating in programs "that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis." "We felt we really didn't have an alternative," she said. "And it was not without regret."


    strib

    Courtest of TPM (none / 0) (#58)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 04:12:50 PM EST
    Juan Williams' Worst Nightmare

    Stuff Muslims wear.

    Parent

    I find this amusing (3.50 / 2) (#14)
    by Slado on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:41:38 AM EST
    To see so many bending over backwards to defend the logic of this firing.

    Just say it.  They and you hate Fox News and this was the perfect fake scandal to take out Juan Williams.

    At least the debate is over now.  NPR has shown it's true colors and there's no need to pretend their a straight news organization anymore.

    Look no further then Nina Totenburg.  A simple google leads to a long line of truly partisan liberal comments from a so called "reporter" but NPR could care less.   As long as your opinion is the opinion of management they don't have an issue.

    We who choose to live in the real world have long ago made peace with the reality that PBS, NPR, CPB, PRI and all are nothing more then the last bastion of liberal elite media.

    Do I care?  No.  I listen to NPR because they do good non political stories and I turn the radio when someone like Nina comes on to do her "reporting".  As if I don't know what she's going to say.

    A Straight News Organization (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:45:23 AM EST
    would, by definition, hate Fox News. They are everything that a straight news organization would abhor.

    MSNBC, on the other hand, likes that there is a Fox News. A Yin to their Yang.

    Jaun Williams does not intrude on my life (neither does Fox News for that matter) so I don't really think about them much anymore.

    Seriously, how many Glenn Beck or O'Reilly posts do you see my write? I stopped caring.

    This one interested me because folks went wild when someon got canned - millions of people have lost their job, but this firing is BIG.

    It's incredibly revealing.

    Parent

    NPR is not a straight news organization (none / 0) (#29)
    by Slado on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:59:53 AM EST
    One of those does not exist anymore, if it ever did.

    Media has always been biased.  

    I like you could care less that Juan was fired.  I mean is he going to be worse off after all this publicity?  Hardly.

    I like certain programs on Public Radio.  After the war coverage on NPR I stopped listening to them.  In fact most of my morning/afternoon drives are spent listening to Howard Stern.  Go figure.

    My choice, my prerogative but lets not pretend, which I only assume your doing, I could be wrong, that NPR is a straight news organization.

    They need to get over themselves.

    Parent

    I don;t think they (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:07:47 AM EST
    are a straight news organization. I don't think they are a good news organization. (Which does not requires being a straight news organization BTW.)

    I don't really care about NPR.

    But the howling is revealing and amusing.

    Let's face it, there are no journalists at Fox.

    No actual Straight news organization would ever let their reporters work for Fox in any capacity.

    Parent

    While I understand your contempt (none / 0) (#40)
    by Slado on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 12:00:15 PM EST
    for Fox lets not go crazy and say there are "no" journalists over there.

    There are plenty of journalists over there as there are plenty of hacks, talking heads and all kinds.

    The reality is they are winning the current media game and providing a product that people like.

    Love them or hate them they are profitable and I watch some programs because they fill a certain need but I'm not a Fox supporter, only a consumer.

    I watch some shows on MSNBC, some on Fox Buisness, CNBC and listen to Public Radio programs like Diane Rehm, Fresh Air, Talk of the Nation and Radio Times.

    I am a news consumer and try not to identify myself with a certain network or news outlet because if I did I would most certainly be let down quite often.

    Parent

    There are no journalists at Fox (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 12:59:23 PM EST
    You can't be one. It's not allowed.

    LEt's be honest for once.

    Parent

    Fake scandal? Not in the way you mean it (none / 0) (#20)
    by Farmboy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:01:52 AM EST
    The man is an admitted bigot, who has no qualms about his bigotry. He is a self-made orphan. No sympathy from me.

    The fake scandal is the mock consternation being spread about NPR's firing him for his expressions of hate and fear of Muslims. The fake scandal is designed to deflect attention from his very real ignominious behavior.

    As you don't seem to understand, the issue isn't that he's a bigot, it's that people think that it's okay for him to spread his bigotry while pretending to be a journalist. That's the real scandal.


    Parent

    Bigot is a strong word (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Slado on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 12:02:57 PM EST
    and should be saved for bigots.

    Definition of bigot...

    "a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own"

    That my friend is not Juan Williams.  

    I don't particularly like JW as an analyst because I don't think he's very smart.

    I guess in your world that make me a bigot since the word doesn't mean anything anymore.

    Parent

    definition of bigot: one who is bigoted (none / 0) (#56)
    by Farmboy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 03:21:26 PM EST
    Definition of bigoted: expressing or characterized by prejudice and intolerance.

    Let's play a quick round of Name That Fox Employee: "Ooooh! A person wearing a turban! How dare he be on a plane where I can see him! Officer, arrest him - I think he's a terrorist!"

    Your deflections aside, the point isn't that Juan Williams is an intolerant chump - he admitted that and it's a free country - the faux rage is from folks who think his employer firing him for using the airways to spread his prejudice and intolerance is a bad thing.

    Parent

    We might end up... (none / 0) (#2)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:03:16 AM EST
    with an actual ethical journalistic entity when this brew-ha-ha is over...imagine that?

    Don't bet on it (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Slado on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 12:05:00 PM EST
    News is biased.

    Unless we send out robots to report on exactly what they see then you can't stop the imagination and inclination of the reporter, editor or program director from seeping in.  Just isn't going to happen.

    Every priest doesn't give the same sermon and every reporter doesn't tell the same story the same way.

    Parent

    great post BTD (none / 0) (#3)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:04:43 AM EST
    but you know, you really should be posting someplace like the big orange where, you know, serious people can read it.

    assume you saw (none / 0) (#4)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:08:39 AM EST
    this

    Parent
    maybe I deserve the mockery (none / 0) (#35)
    by jes on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:35:01 AM EST
    but I did not say 'more serious' Capt. Howdy - I said 'more eyes'.

    Parent
    nothing personal (none / 0) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 12:54:41 PM EST
    sort of an inside joke

    Parent
    what amazes me (none / 0) (#5)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:11:16 AM EST
    and I guess it shouldnt is how virtually universal the MSM condemnation of this is.  from Lou Dobbs to Gene Robinson.  its circle the wagons time.

    Even (none / 0) (#6)
    by jbindc on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:15:31 AM EST
    The ladies of "The View" condemned it.

    What's next?  Oprah?

    Parent

    it is the best illustration I can think of (5.00 / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:20:12 AM EST
    showing how completely clueless the MSM is to what the job of the MSM should, IMO, and in fact used to be.  unbiased presentation of the news.

    they honestly see no conflict in a guy being an opinion pusher on one show and then going on another and pretending to be unbiased.

    tv journalism has been dead for a while.  sometimes it just takes a strong breeze for us to remember how bad it smells.


    Parent

    From Juan's statement (none / 0) (#8)
    by lilburro on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:27:59 AM EST
    Two days later, Ellen Weiss, my boss at NPR, called to say I had crossed the line, essentially accusing me of bigotry. She took the admission of my visceral fear of people dressed in Muslim garb at the airport as evidence that I am a bigot. She said there are people who wear Muslim garb to work at NPR and they are offended by my comments.

    God.  I can't believe so many people are having a hard time with this.  Of course Juan Williams has done nothing to apologize for the fact that actually, his statement was hurtful and would certainly be interpreted that way.  Free speech doesn't mean you get to spout sh*t without consequence.  

    In context it was an admission of prejudice... (none / 0) (#13)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 09:39:01 AM EST
    with regret.  I don't see what muslims have to be offended about, taken in full context.  

    But of course, to each their own offense and voicing of it...but there are "pc boy cried wolf" consequences to that too, people may think you are part of the "can't wait to get offended" brigade, and cease to take you seriously.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#22)
    by lilburro on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:11:51 AM EST
    tell that to the Council of American Islamic Relations.

    The most disgusting thing about all this is that the response has been "most Americans think this!"  "It's the truth!"  Which is what Juan Williams himself said (here).  That's just completely backwards.  He can sort his sh*t out...off the air.

    Parent

    I don't know about most... (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:36:47 AM EST
    but many do...it's a sad truth, facing it and discussing it should not be taboo.

    Many Americans are afraid of muslims in full religous garb...many are also afraid of bankers in Brooks Brothers suits, cops in uniform, black men wearing red or blue, hispanics in yellow, Mexicans with hedgetrimmers, and politicians with flag pin lapels.  Prejudice is everywhere...making it taboo to talk about serves us how?

    Parent

    I doubt there's more than (5.00 / 0) (#47)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 01:14:18 PM EST
    10% of the population in this country that could, for instance, tell the difference between Sikh "garb" and Muslim garb (as if any terrorist with half a brain would be out there at the airport dressed like Osama in the mountains of Waziristan)

    Me, I start getting nervous when I see those young Aryans in the white shirts and ties approaching.  

    Parent

    I get (none / 0) (#48)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 01:45:39 PM EST
    nervous when I see a man with a shaved head, combat boots, and wearing a swastika.  I get particularly nervous if there are a bunch of them.

    Parent
    "We Der Volk", (none / 0) (#49)
    by jondee on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 02:05:10 PM EST
    that new Fox and Friends regular installment, was planned to start next year. How did you find out about it?

     

    Parent

    LOL! (none / 0) (#50)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 02:23:11 PM EST
    Don't give them any ideas, jondee!   ;-)

    Parent
    And their (none / 0) (#52)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 02:25:55 PM EST
    theme song will be this.

    Parent
    Silly rabbits... (none / 0) (#51)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 02:25:38 PM EST
    badge and a blue jacket is still the scariest on sight human being of them all...or the ugly sports jacket of the detec or g-man.

    Anybody else you got a reasonable fight or flee chance.

    Parent

    Maybe, (none / 0) (#53)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 02:34:31 PM EST
    Maybe not, kdog.  I agree that the police and the powers of the government enforcers have become far too scary, but I still think we have to worry about the armed whack-jobs who think that their way is the only way.  Those of us who wish to live a peaceful life, with tolerance and freedom for all, will be caught between a rock (the increasing police state) and a hard place (the political extremists).

    Parent
    Rock and a hard place... (none / 0) (#54)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 02:47:37 PM EST
    or as Citizen Cope puts it, we gone and put ourselves between a "A Bullet and a Target".

    Great song, check it out Z.

    Parent

    Not my (none / 0) (#55)
    by Zorba on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 03:15:57 PM EST
    kind of music, Dog, but I appreciate the sentiments.  It's going to get a lot worse in this country, IMHO, before it gets better.  (If it ever does.)

    Parent
    Oh yes (none / 0) (#27)
    by lilburro on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 10:51:21 AM EST
    Fox is renowned for its aggressive reporting on politicians with flag pin lapels and cops in uniform.

    Full transcript of Williams' statements.

    O'REILLY: Well, there isn't any theology involved in this at all from my perspective, Juan. But you live in the liberal precincts. You actually work for NPR, OK?

    WILLIAMS: Yes.

    It is a canard to believe that Fox has any interest in honestly discussing anything, which is what this is about.  If NPR doesn't want to be associated with him, they don't have to be associated with him.  Fox News uses NPR's reputation in ways they probably don't agree with, Juan Williams contributes to that...etc.

    Parent

    Of course... (none / 0) (#32)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:11:39 AM EST
    Fox doesn't care...whatever drives up ratings and sells the 30 second spots works for them.

    Forget FOX...why can't we as a nation talk about such issues without the pc alarms going off?

    Parent

    True (none / 0) (#36)
    by lilburro on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:36:09 AM EST
    but that conversation isn't going to happen on Fox.  Juan's comments fit in too neatly with the Fox trends, and his own trends vis a vis Fox.

    IMO the furor is more important than his comments with regard to this conversation.  If advocacy groups hadn't spoken up, nobody would've said anything about what Juan said, certainly not your average Fox viewer.  They don't think he said anything notable at all.  And now I find that some people think it's the obvious truth that people are "worried" about people wearing clothes that correspond to their religious beliefs.  What???  It's especially offensive to me because one of my best friends is Pakistani.  Why do they have to deal with this kind of boneheaded rhetoric?  What is this statement if not a bigoted assumption that you have to be wearing blue jeans to love America?

    I got to tell you, 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.  [emphasis supplied]

    I just think that is a crazy thing to say.

    Parent

    It is crazy... (none / 0) (#38)
    by kdog on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 11:47:35 AM EST
    and I'm glad it is being discussed, err make that semi-discussed...you're right that its become all about the furor over the firing instead of what we should be talking about...prejudice.  

    Parent
    "most" americans (none / 0) (#44)
    by cpinva on Fri Oct 22, 2010 at 12:05:46 PM EST
    have never knowingly met a muslim, much less seen one "dressed in native garb", other than that time they inadvertantly stumbled onto the national geographic channel, while trying to find professional wrestling. or it might have been the bass pro shops' fishing channel. whatever.

    to be honest, it was for the best really. if you're juan williams, do you really want an entire tv audience seeing you wet your pants? if you're NPR, do you really need the extra expense of having to dry-clean mr. williams chair every evening? no, of course not.

    Has NPR Been Thrown Into The Briar Patch? | 58 comments (58 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment