You are not allowed to say what you think

Juan Williams, the African-American journalist who is often the token liberal on Fox News, was fired by National Public Radio for saying that passengers in Muslim garb on airplanes make him nervous.  This was in the context of arguing with Bill O’Reilly that he should be careful about stereotyping all Muslims as extremists.  See Williams’ self-defense: FoxNews.com – JUAN WILLIAMS: I Was Fired for Telling the Truth.

Other public figures have been getting pilloried for saying that they do not approve of homosexuality or masturbation or evolution or whatever.  These are things that lots of people think, but it’s not socially acceptable to say so.  Is freedom of speech just something for the government to not infringe, or should it be a value that the culture as a whole upholds, if it is to actually be a free society?  That is to say, if people lose their jobs for stating their opinion, do we really have free speech?

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Daniel Gorman

    ” That is to say, if people lose their jobs for stating their opinion, do we really have free speech?”

    Yes. The fired employee retains all his free speech rights. But to deny employers the right to fire employees who violate public speaking policies is to deny the employer’s the right to free speech.

  • Daniel Gorman

    ” That is to say, if people lose their jobs for stating their opinion, do we really have free speech?”

    Yes. The fired employee retains all his free speech rights. But to deny employers the right to fire employees who violate public speaking policies is to deny the employer’s the right to free speech.

  • Tom Hering

    Williams did well by violating NPR’s policy for it’s news analysts, who are not supposed to express their personal opinions, on NPR or elsewhere, while employed. What do I mean by “did well”? A $2,000,000.00, 3-year contract with FOX News.

  • Tom Hering

    Williams did well by violating NPR’s policy for it’s news analysts, who are not supposed to express their personal opinions, on NPR or elsewhere, while employed. What do I mean by “did well”? A $2,000,000.00, 3-year contract with FOX News.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    Daniel, I’m not sure it makes sense to say that a fired employee retains all his free speech rights. Technically, so does one who is executed for speaking his mind. A man needs to eat, after all, so the threat of losing one’s job over voicing an opinion is a real and valid method of silencing opinion. If he chooses to speak, he will suffer the consequences – that is how all abrogation of speech works.

    This brings up two other issues here besides “free” speech. The first is the issue of platform – Williams was fired for giving his opinion in a format designed for him to do just that. It is bad mojo for NPR to fire anyone for giving one’s opinion…I bet the screaming heads on the right take this one and run. As if NPR didn’t have enough trouble getting funds already.

    The second issue is that we seem to have developed an increasingly relative sense of ethics, controlled not by concepts of right and wrong so much as by not offending people. I do not believe in a rude society, but neither do I believe in a society so fragile that honest fears – even phobias – cannot be expressed without fear of retribution.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    Daniel, I’m not sure it makes sense to say that a fired employee retains all his free speech rights. Technically, so does one who is executed for speaking his mind. A man needs to eat, after all, so the threat of losing one’s job over voicing an opinion is a real and valid method of silencing opinion. If he chooses to speak, he will suffer the consequences – that is how all abrogation of speech works.

    This brings up two other issues here besides “free” speech. The first is the issue of platform – Williams was fired for giving his opinion in a format designed for him to do just that. It is bad mojo for NPR to fire anyone for giving one’s opinion…I bet the screaming heads on the right take this one and run. As if NPR didn’t have enough trouble getting funds already.

    The second issue is that we seem to have developed an increasingly relative sense of ethics, controlled not by concepts of right and wrong so much as by not offending people. I do not believe in a rude society, but neither do I believe in a society so fragile that honest fears – even phobias – cannot be expressed without fear of retribution.

  • Tom Hering

    The conditions of Williams’ contract with NPR (freely entered into) were clear enough. What is allowed – personal opinions – on FOX News conflicted with that contract. So something had to give, or rather, should have been given up voluntarily by Williams, before all this.

    How many employment contracts allow an employee to engage in activities that conflict with the best interests of the employer?

    Williams is no martyr in the cause of free speech. Not at his new salary of $666,666.66 a year. (Kind of spooky, eh? :-) )

  • Tom Hering

    The conditions of Williams’ contract with NPR (freely entered into) were clear enough. What is allowed – personal opinions – on FOX News conflicted with that contract. So something had to give, or rather, should have been given up voluntarily by Williams, before all this.

    How many employment contracts allow an employee to engage in activities that conflict with the best interests of the employer?

    Williams is no martyr in the cause of free speech. Not at his new salary of $666,666.66 a year. (Kind of spooky, eh? :-) )

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    It is more like certain ideas will not be tolerated. The idea that a certain group of people scares someone is an idea that will not be tolerated. The fact that the fear is not baseless cannot be discussed. Sure we should see people as individuals, however, a muslim terrorist is not just coincidently muslim. He is a terrorist because of his extreme religious position.

    Sure an organization has a right to prioritize its message over that of its employees, however, it may not also then hold itself out as tolerant of free speech, open and honest discussion and valuing diverse points of view.

    They can’t be both tolerant and intolerant at the same time.

    Mr. Williams was in seeing individuals in terms of their group. This is the continuing problem in our society. We know there are group differences and any given individual may be more or less like his group. We also know that certain groups have a higher incidence rate for certain behaviors. It is not bigoted to say so, but it is also not tolerated. Homicidal maniacs scare people, and there have been a few homicidal maniacs motivated by Islam. So, his fear isn’t totally baseless. Rationally we know that muslims in general aren’t dangerous, but Mr. Williams is a New Yorker and maybe he was traumatized by the Sept. 11 attacks and maybe seeing muslims in airports reminds him of how he felt. Publicly sharing that feeling obviously is intolerable to NPR execs.

    Even though technically his remarks were not improper, NPR may wish to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    It is more like certain ideas will not be tolerated. The idea that a certain group of people scares someone is an idea that will not be tolerated. The fact that the fear is not baseless cannot be discussed. Sure we should see people as individuals, however, a muslim terrorist is not just coincidently muslim. He is a terrorist because of his extreme religious position.

    Sure an organization has a right to prioritize its message over that of its employees, however, it may not also then hold itself out as tolerant of free speech, open and honest discussion and valuing diverse points of view.

    They can’t be both tolerant and intolerant at the same time.

    Mr. Williams was in seeing individuals in terms of their group. This is the continuing problem in our society. We know there are group differences and any given individual may be more or less like his group. We also know that certain groups have a higher incidence rate for certain behaviors. It is not bigoted to say so, but it is also not tolerated. Homicidal maniacs scare people, and there have been a few homicidal maniacs motivated by Islam. So, his fear isn’t totally baseless. Rationally we know that muslims in general aren’t dangerous, but Mr. Williams is a New Yorker and maybe he was traumatized by the Sept. 11 attacks and maybe seeing muslims in airports reminds him of how he felt. Publicly sharing that feeling obviously is intolerable to NPR execs.

    Even though technically his remarks were not improper, NPR may wish to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “As if NPR didn’t have enough trouble getting funds already.”

    “How many employment contracts allow an employee to engage in activities that conflict with the best interests of the employer?”

    Um, best interests, and getting funds?

    LOL

    NPR has trouble getting funds because it doesn’t act in its own best interest.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “As if NPR didn’t have enough trouble getting funds already.”

    “How many employment contracts allow an employee to engage in activities that conflict with the best interests of the employer?”

    Um, best interests, and getting funds?

    LOL

    NPR has trouble getting funds because it doesn’t act in its own best interest.

  • Tom Hering

    sg @ 5 & 6, not surprisingly, your ideology causes you to miss the point. It has nothing to do with issues of tolerance and intolerance, free speech and political correctness. Mr. Williams was hired as a news analyst by NPR, and NPR’s contract with news analysts does not allow them to express their personal opinions on the air. Granted, Mr. Williams expressed his opinion while performing his duties for his other employer, FOX News (which does indeed allow its news analysts to express their personal opinions on the air). But NPR was justified in deciding that the different conditions at Mr. Williams’ other employer undermined the persona it wants its own news analysts to maintain. Further, NPR has received more complaints about Mr. Williams than about any of its other news analysts – for the last two years in a row. The split (unfortunately involuntary) was a long time coming.

  • Tom Hering

    sg @ 5 & 6, not surprisingly, your ideology causes you to miss the point. It has nothing to do with issues of tolerance and intolerance, free speech and political correctness. Mr. Williams was hired as a news analyst by NPR, and NPR’s contract with news analysts does not allow them to express their personal opinions on the air. Granted, Mr. Williams expressed his opinion while performing his duties for his other employer, FOX News (which does indeed allow its news analysts to express their personal opinions on the air). But NPR was justified in deciding that the different conditions at Mr. Williams’ other employer undermined the persona it wants its own news analysts to maintain. Further, NPR has received more complaints about Mr. Williams than about any of its other news analysts – for the last two years in a row. The split (unfortunately involuntary) was a long time coming.

  • Amy

    The right to “free speech” extends to government entities, not private corporations. Say what you want in public, in your living room, in a Congressional hearing, and you cannot be arrested or otherwise censured by the government (within some bounds… for instance, you CAN be arrested for making a fake bomb threat or yelling “Fire!” in a theater) — but if your boss doesn’t like what you say, he can absolutely fire you, and it’s not a violation of the free speech clause UNLESS you are a government employee.

  • Amy

    The right to “free speech” extends to government entities, not private corporations. Say what you want in public, in your living room, in a Congressional hearing, and you cannot be arrested or otherwise censured by the government (within some bounds… for instance, you CAN be arrested for making a fake bomb threat or yelling “Fire!” in a theater) — but if your boss doesn’t like what you say, he can absolutely fire you, and it’s not a violation of the free speech clause UNLESS you are a government employee.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “sg @ 5 & 6, not surprisingly, your ideology causes you to miss the point.”

    What ideology?

    ” It has nothing to do with issues of tolerance and intolerance, free speech and political correctness.”

    Sure it does. It is the topic of the blogpost.

    “Mr. Williams was hired as a news analyst by NPR, and NPR’s contract with news analysts does not allow them to express their personal opinions on the air.”

    I addressed that.

    By saying I am going in the wrong direction, you are trying to get me to stop discussing the issue. Why? Maybe its your ideology. ;-)

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “sg @ 5 & 6, not surprisingly, your ideology causes you to miss the point.”

    What ideology?

    ” It has nothing to do with issues of tolerance and intolerance, free speech and political correctness.”

    Sure it does. It is the topic of the blogpost.

    “Mr. Williams was hired as a news analyst by NPR, and NPR’s contract with news analysts does not allow them to express their personal opinions on the air.”

    I addressed that.

    By saying I am going in the wrong direction, you are trying to get me to stop discussing the issue. Why? Maybe its your ideology. ;-)

  • Tom

    What about the fact that NPR is (at least substantially) publicly-funded? Do “we the people” now turn around and “fire” NPR for taking a position not in keeping with “our” values? Wouldn’t that be an interesting turn of events…

  • Tom

    What about the fact that NPR is (at least substantially) publicly-funded? Do “we the people” now turn around and “fire” NPR for taking a position not in keeping with “our” values? Wouldn’t that be an interesting turn of events…

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “if your boss doesn’t like what you say, he can absolutely fire you, and it’s not a violation of the free speech clause UNLESS you are a government employee.”

    So, was Williams a gov’t employee as an employee of the quasi public NPR?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “if your boss doesn’t like what you say, he can absolutely fire you, and it’s not a violation of the free speech clause UNLESS you are a government employee.”

    So, was Williams a gov’t employee as an employee of the quasi public NPR?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “Do “we the people” now turn around and “fire” NPR for taking a position not in keeping with “our” values? Wouldn’t that be an interesting turn of events…”

    Good point, as well as a good argument for an entirely independent press with no government connections or funding.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “Do “we the people” now turn around and “fire” NPR for taking a position not in keeping with “our” values? Wouldn’t that be an interesting turn of events…”

    Good point, as well as a good argument for an entirely independent press with no government connections or funding.

  • CRB

    Here’s a question for anyone who cares to tackle it:
    Since Mr. Obama is employed by “we, the people,” is he free to
    say whatever he likes (the examples are too numerous to list,
    but you can google them) or can we “fire” him? And I do not
    mean, waiting until 2012 to vote him out of office!

  • CRB

    Here’s a question for anyone who cares to tackle it:
    Since Mr. Obama is employed by “we, the people,” is he free to
    say whatever he likes (the examples are too numerous to list,
    but you can google them) or can we “fire” him? And I do not
    mean, waiting until 2012 to vote him out of office!

  • mark†

    My understanding of whether NPR violated the First Amendment in firing Juan Williams is that they have not. NPR is not a government entity. What about the fact that they receive government funding? The government would have had to impose conditions on NPR as they have done with regard to colleges and universities which receive government funds.

  • mark†

    My understanding of whether NPR violated the First Amendment in firing Juan Williams is that they have not. NPR is not a government entity. What about the fact that they receive government funding? The government would have had to impose conditions on NPR as they have done with regard to colleges and universities which receive government funds.

  • Joe

    What Veith is really asking is it terms of political theory is should we transform free speech, which is currently a negative right, into a positive right.

    A negative right is something you have the right to do and the gov’t cannot stop you from doing it.

    A positive right is a right that you have but the gov’t is obliged to facilitate or to prevent other private citizens from hampering your right. (for example the right to vote).

    Inherent in positive rights is the reduction of liberty necessary to allow the gov’t to be the enforcer. Sometimes this is a good thing and sometimes it is not. I think making free speech a positive right is an inherently bad idea. It infringes on to many other rights and freedoms – the freedom to contract, private property rights, my freedom of expression through the practice of not allowing certain speech by my agents, etc.

  • Joe

    What Veith is really asking is it terms of political theory is should we transform free speech, which is currently a negative right, into a positive right.

    A negative right is something you have the right to do and the gov’t cannot stop you from doing it.

    A positive right is a right that you have but the gov’t is obliged to facilitate or to prevent other private citizens from hampering your right. (for example the right to vote).

    Inherent in positive rights is the reduction of liberty necessary to allow the gov’t to be the enforcer. Sometimes this is a good thing and sometimes it is not. I think making free speech a positive right is an inherently bad idea. It infringes on to many other rights and freedoms – the freedom to contract, private property rights, my freedom of expression through the practice of not allowing certain speech by my agents, etc.

  • Tom Hering

    “What about the fact that NPR is (at least substantially) publicly-funded?” – Tom @ 10.

    Incorrect. NPR is a private, not-for-profit corporation which receives only 16% of its funding from the CPB. And it’s government funding has decreased year by year.

  • Tom Hering

    “What about the fact that NPR is (at least substantially) publicly-funded?” – Tom @ 10.

    Incorrect. NPR is a private, not-for-profit corporation which receives only 16% of its funding from the CPB. And it’s government funding has decreased year by year.

  • Joe

    Tom – my understanding is that it gets a lot of indirect support – as in direct support to the radio stations that air the programming that NPR produces and donations for foundations that receive money from the feds. All that said, I really don’t think it matters. I think Mark+ has the analysis right.

    The bigger question is should there be any gov’t support for NPR given that we have so many media outlets.

  • Joe

    Tom – my understanding is that it gets a lot of indirect support – as in direct support to the radio stations that air the programming that NPR produces and donations for foundations that receive money from the feds. All that said, I really don’t think it matters. I think Mark+ has the analysis right.

    The bigger question is should there be any gov’t support for NPR given that we have so many media outlets.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    First of all, since when is NPR private in any meaningful sense of the word? I seem to remember billions of public dollars being thrown their way over the years–they’re really not much more “private” than any other branch of government.

    Put mildly, they do not have the same rights to hire and fire as truly private entities like CBS, Fox, and the New York Times as long as they’re receiving public money.

    That said, the real solution is to defund them AND require that they no longer use the names “NPR” and “PBS”, which would indicate some level of government approval.

    Maybe if we did, we could get some decent classical and jazz stations…..

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    First of all, since when is NPR private in any meaningful sense of the word? I seem to remember billions of public dollars being thrown their way over the years–they’re really not much more “private” than any other branch of government.

    Put mildly, they do not have the same rights to hire and fire as truly private entities like CBS, Fox, and the New York Times as long as they’re receiving public money.

    That said, the real solution is to defund them AND require that they no longer use the names “NPR” and “PBS”, which would indicate some level of government approval.

    Maybe if we did, we could get some decent classical and jazz stations…..

  • S Bauer

    I agree that NPR did not infringe on William’s constitutional “free speech” rights. Any employer has the right to set the terms of how its employees are to represent the employer publically.

    But NPR has unmasked itself as an entity that is opposed to “free speech” in the sense of a free exchange of ideas and debate in the pursuit of truth that the 1st amendment “free speech” was intended to foster. It is always this necessity for “free flow of information” that NPR and the mainstream media hold up as their entire reason for existence. The real problem is their “self-censorship” of everything that the elites in charge of these news organizations consider “beyond the pale” or politically incorrect. If they want to go at news reporting that way, so be it. The tax payers don’t have to fund it, however.

    I see different percentages of government funding for NPR bandied about. I suppose it depends on whether one is looking at NPR’s budget alone, or one includes the budgets of its member stations. Whatever the figure, it is always qualified with the word “only”. So, if it isn’t all that much, NPR shouldn’t miss it.

  • S Bauer

    I agree that NPR did not infringe on William’s constitutional “free speech” rights. Any employer has the right to set the terms of how its employees are to represent the employer publically.

    But NPR has unmasked itself as an entity that is opposed to “free speech” in the sense of a free exchange of ideas and debate in the pursuit of truth that the 1st amendment “free speech” was intended to foster. It is always this necessity for “free flow of information” that NPR and the mainstream media hold up as their entire reason for existence. The real problem is their “self-censorship” of everything that the elites in charge of these news organizations consider “beyond the pale” or politically incorrect. If they want to go at news reporting that way, so be it. The tax payers don’t have to fund it, however.

    I see different percentages of government funding for NPR bandied about. I suppose it depends on whether one is looking at NPR’s budget alone, or one includes the budgets of its member stations. Whatever the figure, it is always qualified with the word “only”. So, if it isn’t all that much, NPR shouldn’t miss it.

  • Dennis Peskey

    Apparently, NPR needs additional schooling in basic journalism. To terminate Mr. Williams for comments made on a competing news outlet is just plain stupid. Mr. Williams violation is not what he said on FOX news; his violation is that he was employed both by NPR and Fox simultaneously. This point was brought out in his response link to the termination. I can only presume that NPR’s contracts are insufficient to control their employees.

    NPR has the right as an employer to a certain degree of control over the conduct of its employees. When Mr. Williams first appeared on FOX, this situation was addressed with his senior editors (as he noted). What was not done by NPR was to make clear the obvious discrepancy in these dual appearances. Both NPR and Fox news have a vision of how news is to be presented. The controlling factor in the vision is the owner/publisher of the news outlet.

    Fox news is openly vocal about the news it presents (which is neither fair nor balanced.) NPR desires to present the same measure of ‘fair and balanced’ from a different perspective (ditto ‘fair and balanced.) Both outlets approach the ‘news’ from their paradigms – from this perspective, they do present ‘fair and balanced’ news. This is pure caveat emptor and would be capitalism at its best (were not one of the entities feeding at the public trough.)

    From what Mr. Williams stated in his article, NPR attempted to remedy their deficiency after he began working with Fox. I would suggest NPR consider terminating their lawyers and hiring another group which could protect their interest from the onset, rather than allowing a situation like this to develop with subsequent embarassment to their employment policies.

    No news reporter has freedom of speech – you read (or print) the copy approved by a team of senior editors. These editors report to ‘higher ups, aka publisher/owner’ who run these news groups for a profit. To address Dr. Veith’s query concerning NPR’s right to terminate Mr. Williams, the answer must be yes. The yes must be qualified by the business concerns of the news outlet; i.e., don’t terminate him for what he said – terminate him because of where and why he spoke.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    Apparently, NPR needs additional schooling in basic journalism. To terminate Mr. Williams for comments made on a competing news outlet is just plain stupid. Mr. Williams violation is not what he said on FOX news; his violation is that he was employed both by NPR and Fox simultaneously. This point was brought out in his response link to the termination. I can only presume that NPR’s contracts are insufficient to control their employees.

    NPR has the right as an employer to a certain degree of control over the conduct of its employees. When Mr. Williams first appeared on FOX, this situation was addressed with his senior editors (as he noted). What was not done by NPR was to make clear the obvious discrepancy in these dual appearances. Both NPR and Fox news have a vision of how news is to be presented. The controlling factor in the vision is the owner/publisher of the news outlet.

    Fox news is openly vocal about the news it presents (which is neither fair nor balanced.) NPR desires to present the same measure of ‘fair and balanced’ from a different perspective (ditto ‘fair and balanced.) Both outlets approach the ‘news’ from their paradigms – from this perspective, they do present ‘fair and balanced’ news. This is pure caveat emptor and would be capitalism at its best (were not one of the entities feeding at the public trough.)

    From what Mr. Williams stated in his article, NPR attempted to remedy their deficiency after he began working with Fox. I would suggest NPR consider terminating their lawyers and hiring another group which could protect their interest from the onset, rather than allowing a situation like this to develop with subsequent embarassment to their employment policies.

    No news reporter has freedom of speech – you read (or print) the copy approved by a team of senior editors. These editors report to ‘higher ups, aka publisher/owner’ who run these news groups for a profit. To address Dr. Veith’s query concerning NPR’s right to terminate Mr. Williams, the answer must be yes. The yes must be qualified by the business concerns of the news outlet; i.e., don’t terminate him for what he said – terminate him because of where and why he spoke.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dust

    CRB at 13….great question, here’s a crack at an answer (note, have not really thought about it, nor know much about it, but these are my first reactions….so don’t expect too much precision or accuracy!):

    1. The President is not “employed” in the sense of a civil servant, he is “elected” and that probably makes some difference.

    2. Am sure the President and most all other elected officials have something like “tenure” enjoyed by most Professors at Universities and Colleges. What they say has to be protected and allowance given, since the circumstances of their position require it.

    3. Senior government officials (again not the civil service) but elected and appointed enjoy something along the lines of “diplomatic immunity” and suppose that is for the best?

    4. One exception might be if the statement involves a crime, but even that would be difficult if you recall President Clinton’s “lies” to a Grand Jury. Those would land most normal citizens in a bit of hot water, eh?

    OK, that’ it…now you know :)

  • Dust

    CRB at 13….great question, here’s a crack at an answer (note, have not really thought about it, nor know much about it, but these are my first reactions….so don’t expect too much precision or accuracy!):

    1. The President is not “employed” in the sense of a civil servant, he is “elected” and that probably makes some difference.

    2. Am sure the President and most all other elected officials have something like “tenure” enjoyed by most Professors at Universities and Colleges. What they say has to be protected and allowance given, since the circumstances of their position require it.

    3. Senior government officials (again not the civil service) but elected and appointed enjoy something along the lines of “diplomatic immunity” and suppose that is for the best?

    4. One exception might be if the statement involves a crime, but even that would be difficult if you recall President Clinton’s “lies” to a Grand Jury. Those would land most normal citizens in a bit of hot water, eh?

    OK, that’ it…now you know :)

  • CRB

    Good points! Thanks!

  • CRB

    Good points! Thanks!

  • http://scottishlutheran.blogspot.com Michael Keith

    Wow…. it is almost like you are living in Canada. Here the so called Human Rights Tribunals/Commissions watch speech in an Orwellian way.

  • http://scottishlutheran.blogspot.com Michael Keith

    Wow…. it is almost like you are living in Canada. Here the so called Human Rights Tribunals/Commissions watch speech in an Orwellian way.

  • larry

    As much as I despise NPR and think this was foolish of them to do:
    I’d have to say yes they can. Even if it receives government funding. Why? Because this then can become VERY slippery. What about churches who are allowed to be non-profit organizations through the tax code? If NPR cannot fire Mr. Williams on these grounds (that they receive government funding), even if we hate their politics ourselves personally, then it becomes very dangerous. What about a church or church entity that fires a homosexual or some other issue over their stance that is against what the church believes (this has happened before at Baptist colleges).
    You see “the right” to be exempt from taxes appears to be a freedom, but never forget who and how that “right” is given to you in this world. It’s not, in this world, an inherent right based solely on existence, it is extended by the power of the governing authority (no matter our opinions otherwise).
    I’m conservative in my politics, always have been but this is why I see a “just as much” danger on the right as I do on the left. The right screams, “investigate NPR because they receive funding”, knee jerk I’d say, “Yea.” But after careful thought, I’d say, “Whoooaa big boy, think this through”. If the right gets there way with this, the left can come back and turn it against things we normally support, tax exempt status for churches for example.
    I think the greatest danger to freedom in this country is the zig zaggin left/right politics against each other making this law and that law that in totality is eroding our freedoms, the two mortal enemies of each other are in sum total antagonistic allies!
    Take for example freedom to bear arms and the NRA. The NRA was against gun registration. But back in the early 90s the NRA was HUGE in many states passing conceal and carry permits to “give rights” (that already existed in most states, at least in the south and west). So through the NRA and gun lobby many states passed conceal and carry permitting. And people got on board, went and took the classes, met the requirements, background checks, paid their fees, got their photos taken on a licensure permit to c and c. And what is that but registration of gun ownership de facto. No its not registering a particular gun but it is registering as a gun owner. Who REALLY won that battle the right or the left? Or was the right a dupe of its own making.
    Beware of the pietism of nationalism on any level and by anyone/group.

  • larry

    As much as I despise NPR and think this was foolish of them to do:
    I’d have to say yes they can. Even if it receives government funding. Why? Because this then can become VERY slippery. What about churches who are allowed to be non-profit organizations through the tax code? If NPR cannot fire Mr. Williams on these grounds (that they receive government funding), even if we hate their politics ourselves personally, then it becomes very dangerous. What about a church or church entity that fires a homosexual or some other issue over their stance that is against what the church believes (this has happened before at Baptist colleges).
    You see “the right” to be exempt from taxes appears to be a freedom, but never forget who and how that “right” is given to you in this world. It’s not, in this world, an inherent right based solely on existence, it is extended by the power of the governing authority (no matter our opinions otherwise).
    I’m conservative in my politics, always have been but this is why I see a “just as much” danger on the right as I do on the left. The right screams, “investigate NPR because they receive funding”, knee jerk I’d say, “Yea.” But after careful thought, I’d say, “Whoooaa big boy, think this through”. If the right gets there way with this, the left can come back and turn it against things we normally support, tax exempt status for churches for example.
    I think the greatest danger to freedom in this country is the zig zaggin left/right politics against each other making this law and that law that in totality is eroding our freedoms, the two mortal enemies of each other are in sum total antagonistic allies!
    Take for example freedom to bear arms and the NRA. The NRA was against gun registration. But back in the early 90s the NRA was HUGE in many states passing conceal and carry permits to “give rights” (that already existed in most states, at least in the south and west). So through the NRA and gun lobby many states passed conceal and carry permitting. And people got on board, went and took the classes, met the requirements, background checks, paid their fees, got their photos taken on a licensure permit to c and c. And what is that but registration of gun ownership de facto. No its not registering a particular gun but it is registering as a gun owner. Who REALLY won that battle the right or the left? Or was the right a dupe of its own making.
    Beware of the pietism of nationalism on any level and by anyone/group.

  • SKPeterson

    NPR was in the right here vis-a-vis the employer-employee relationship. I think much of the dust up has to do with the presumption of hypocrisy on the part of NPR – that had Williams made the disparaging comment about say, the Amish or Roman Catholics or even Sikhs, he wouldn’t have faced the same punishment. He mentioned Muslims though and NPR may really be a bunch of Islamophobes – they really do harbor an irrational fear of Muslims to such an extent they don’t want to upset the bugbears of radical Islam.

  • SKPeterson

    NPR was in the right here vis-a-vis the employer-employee relationship. I think much of the dust up has to do with the presumption of hypocrisy on the part of NPR – that had Williams made the disparaging comment about say, the Amish or Roman Catholics or even Sikhs, he wouldn’t have faced the same punishment. He mentioned Muslims though and NPR may really be a bunch of Islamophobes – they really do harbor an irrational fear of Muslims to such an extent they don’t want to upset the bugbears of radical Islam.

  • S Bauer

    The Tax Code giveth and the Tax Code taketh away (or should those phrases be reversed?).

    The tax exemption for churches is a gift of the American Voter. When enough American Voters can’t stomach what the Church says (Repent and believe the Gospel) — or at least don’t care — they will take that gift away. With my limited ability to foresee the future, this seems inevitable. When it happens, the American Voter will not have done anything contrary to either Kingdom.

    Should I “self-censor” myself from saying what I believe to be true in either the Kingdom of the Left or the Right out of fear of losing this privilege? If I think it’s bad in the Kingdom of the Left for government to fund NPR’s speech because it advances a certain Point of View in the public square and this position also gores my “tax-exempt ox”, so be it.

  • S Bauer

    The Tax Code giveth and the Tax Code taketh away (or should those phrases be reversed?).

    The tax exemption for churches is a gift of the American Voter. When enough American Voters can’t stomach what the Church says (Repent and believe the Gospel) — or at least don’t care — they will take that gift away. With my limited ability to foresee the future, this seems inevitable. When it happens, the American Voter will not have done anything contrary to either Kingdom.

    Should I “self-censor” myself from saying what I believe to be true in either the Kingdom of the Left or the Right out of fear of losing this privilege? If I think it’s bad in the Kingdom of the Left for government to fund NPR’s speech because it advances a certain Point of View in the public square and this position also gores my “tax-exempt ox”, so be it.

  • http://theoldadam.wordpress.com Steve Martin

    This is why government (we) should not fund “news” media.

    NPR wants to squelch free speech…then fine.

    Just let them do it with their OWN money, and not ours.

  • http://theoldadam.wordpress.com Steve Martin

    This is why government (we) should not fund “news” media.

    NPR wants to squelch free speech…then fine.

    Just let them do it with their OWN money, and not ours.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I don’t much care about NPR itself. My wife’s the listener in the family, not me. I think they do some good stuff, but I can’t really say I could make a case for why the government has to fund it, at whatever level that might be.

    I do think Williams’ statement was kind of ridiculous, though. “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.” Okay, first of all, what is “Muslim garb”? Is there a single look they all have? I’ve seen pictures of quite a few Muslims, and “identical” is not exactly a word I’d use to describe them. I suppose I might think some kinds of clothing are more “Muslim” than others (especially that made from muslin … I mean, come on ;) ), but realistically, what I mean by that is “clothing typical of regions that tend to be predominately Muslim”. Do Syrian Christians dress noticeably different from Syrian Muslims? Honestly — I don’t know the answer to that question.

    But here’s my point: how many of the Muslim terrorists that have acted out on an airplane were … “in Muslim garb”? Best I can recall, they were all dressed rather inconspicuously. I’d bet that was kind of the point. People attempting to carry out terrorist attacks without getting caught aren’t likely to be wearing keffiyehs, shouting “Allahu Akbar” at every opportunity, you know? Seems to me that, statistically, if you see a guy wearing clothing that calls attention to himself, makes him stand out, he’s probably one of the last people you need to be nervous about.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    I don’t much care about NPR itself. My wife’s the listener in the family, not me. I think they do some good stuff, but I can’t really say I could make a case for why the government has to fund it, at whatever level that might be.

    I do think Williams’ statement was kind of ridiculous, though. “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.” Okay, first of all, what is “Muslim garb”? Is there a single look they all have? I’ve seen pictures of quite a few Muslims, and “identical” is not exactly a word I’d use to describe them. I suppose I might think some kinds of clothing are more “Muslim” than others (especially that made from muslin … I mean, come on ;) ), but realistically, what I mean by that is “clothing typical of regions that tend to be predominately Muslim”. Do Syrian Christians dress noticeably different from Syrian Muslims? Honestly — I don’t know the answer to that question.

    But here’s my point: how many of the Muslim terrorists that have acted out on an airplane were … “in Muslim garb”? Best I can recall, they were all dressed rather inconspicuously. I’d bet that was kind of the point. People attempting to carry out terrorist attacks without getting caught aren’t likely to be wearing keffiyehs, shouting “Allahu Akbar” at every opportunity, you know? Seems to me that, statistically, if you see a guy wearing clothing that calls attention to himself, makes him stand out, he’s probably one of the last people you need to be nervous about.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    J (@24), nice find. I don’t buy a lot of the clamoring for “freedom” in this situation, either. Freedom is not very valuable when Muslims try to exercise it, but it’s super important when people who are scared of Muslims try to exercise it. So is this maybe more about Muslims than it is about freedom?

    I also am with S Bauer (@27), I think, as far as Larry’s point (@25) about tax exemption here. Sure, let’s enjoy the benefit while we can. But we should never act contrary to our faith so as to protect that exemption. I think most people here would agree. But I also agree with S Bauer that soon it will likely be easier for us to cross that line.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    J (@24), nice find. I don’t buy a lot of the clamoring for “freedom” in this situation, either. Freedom is not very valuable when Muslims try to exercise it, but it’s super important when people who are scared of Muslims try to exercise it. So is this maybe more about Muslims than it is about freedom?

    I also am with S Bauer (@27), I think, as far as Larry’s point (@25) about tax exemption here. Sure, let’s enjoy the benefit while we can. But we should never act contrary to our faith so as to protect that exemption. I think most people here would agree. But I also agree with S Bauer that soon it will likely be easier for us to cross that line.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “The tax exemption for churches is a gift of the American Voter. When enough American Voters can’t stomach what the Church says (Repent and believe the Gospel) — or at least don’t care — they will take that gift away. With my limited ability to foresee the future, this seems inevitable. When it happens, the American Voter will not have done anything contrary to either Kingdom.”

    Amen, brother. Are we going to be cowed by the little tax man? Sheesh, plenty of other Christians were/are executed. We don’t face that.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “The tax exemption for churches is a gift of the American Voter. When enough American Voters can’t stomach what the Church says (Repent and believe the Gospel) — or at least don’t care — they will take that gift away. With my limited ability to foresee the future, this seems inevitable. When it happens, the American Voter will not have done anything contrary to either Kingdom.”

    Amen, brother. Are we going to be cowed by the little tax man? Sheesh, plenty of other Christians were/are executed. We don’t face that.

  • Porcell

    The best way to deal with this outrage is to hit the NPR budget hard. Don’t contribute to it and work politically to deny public funds to it.
    The left in general is an intolerant bunch and NPR is its ne plus ultra. Why should the public that Gallup finds is 40% conservative, 35% moderate and 20% liberal help finance this flaky liberal outfit.

    The irony here is rich in that Williams has written a decent book on civil rights and Fox, that den of iniquitous capitalism, has offered this distinctly liberal fellow a three $million contract.

  • Porcell

    The best way to deal with this outrage is to hit the NPR budget hard. Don’t contribute to it and work politically to deny public funds to it.
    The left in general is an intolerant bunch and NPR is its ne plus ultra. Why should the public that Gallup finds is 40% conservative, 35% moderate and 20% liberal help finance this flaky liberal outfit.

    The irony here is rich in that Williams has written a decent book on civil rights and Fox, that den of iniquitous capitalism, has offered this distinctly liberal fellow a three $million contract.

  • Grace

    The offended be it Muslims, liberals, homosexuals, those of color, it matters little, they believe their rights surpass any belief others may have. SILENCE should be maintained at all times, IF our views contradict their behavior or beliefs.

    In the case of Williams, … he was treated unfairly. I don’t agree with many of his statements, but he is a man who debates within the confines of civility, .. that cannot be said for each side (liberal or conservative) I agree with Williams regarding those who dress in “Muslim garb on airplanes” or anywhere else. I have been told off by Muslim women, for no other reason than they chose to verbally attack, this in the middle of department stores, or the salon that I have been going to for 10 years. Wearing makeup is an issue, abortion, or the subject of O in the oval office. Any number of issues will incite an angry answer or outburst.

    We live in an area with a large population of Muslims. It often becomes difficult to keep silent, they state whatever they like, LOUDLY, but at the same time become bullish, if you believe differently, SILENCE is key to keeping the peace.

    Williams isn’t silent – he has brought an issue on the playing field, from a liberal that will not be SILENCED, I applaud his stand. Hopefully more will follow his lead.

  • Grace

    The offended be it Muslims, liberals, homosexuals, those of color, it matters little, they believe their rights surpass any belief others may have. SILENCE should be maintained at all times, IF our views contradict their behavior or beliefs.

    In the case of Williams, … he was treated unfairly. I don’t agree with many of his statements, but he is a man who debates within the confines of civility, .. that cannot be said for each side (liberal or conservative) I agree with Williams regarding those who dress in “Muslim garb on airplanes” or anywhere else. I have been told off by Muslim women, for no other reason than they chose to verbally attack, this in the middle of department stores, or the salon that I have been going to for 10 years. Wearing makeup is an issue, abortion, or the subject of O in the oval office. Any number of issues will incite an angry answer or outburst.

    We live in an area with a large population of Muslims. It often becomes difficult to keep silent, they state whatever they like, LOUDLY, but at the same time become bullish, if you believe differently, SILENCE is key to keeping the peace.

    Williams isn’t silent – he has brought an issue on the playing field, from a liberal that will not be SILENCED, I applaud his stand. Hopefully more will follow his lead.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    This is Reza Aslan. He is Muslim and is wearing what appear to be “transitions lenses.”
    ROFL. This link made my day. Thanks, J!

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    This is Reza Aslan. He is Muslim and is wearing what appear to be “transitions lenses.”
    ROFL. This link made my day. Thanks, J!

  • ELB

    We who are free have the right to disallow speech by those over whom we have some kind of authority. We can regulate what our children / students / employees say to a degree consistent with their situation. NPR has a right to fire someone just because they don’t like what he says, depending on the contract they have with him.
    I think Veith is really raising the issue of dissalowing speech by those over whom we DO NOT have some kind of authority. In the public forum we have very broad freedom to express ourselves, limited very little by law, and somewhat more by mores. The problem comes when rather than DISAGREE, bullies try to PREVENT someone expressing their views.
    When a public figure, for example, espresses opposition to open homosexuals serving in the military the response is often to shout him down and deplore that he said such a thing, rather than offer countervailing arguments. I deplore the news story that so-and-so said (shock! horror!) such and such.
    This is the essence of political correctness, that there are certain ideas that are just NOT to be expressed.
    Yes, of course “both sides” do this. But the problem is also with the consumers of media who can’t abide civil and thoughtful argument, but prefer sound bites of deploring and denunciation.

    Here’s something to think about: What gives a better format for cogent argumentation, talk radio or the 90-second newscast? Which is more likely to just report, “John Doe said (shocked tone) blah blah blah, and people are just outraged!”?

  • ELB

    We who are free have the right to disallow speech by those over whom we have some kind of authority. We can regulate what our children / students / employees say to a degree consistent with their situation. NPR has a right to fire someone just because they don’t like what he says, depending on the contract they have with him.
    I think Veith is really raising the issue of dissalowing speech by those over whom we DO NOT have some kind of authority. In the public forum we have very broad freedom to express ourselves, limited very little by law, and somewhat more by mores. The problem comes when rather than DISAGREE, bullies try to PREVENT someone expressing their views.
    When a public figure, for example, espresses opposition to open homosexuals serving in the military the response is often to shout him down and deplore that he said such a thing, rather than offer countervailing arguments. I deplore the news story that so-and-so said (shock! horror!) such and such.
    This is the essence of political correctness, that there are certain ideas that are just NOT to be expressed.
    Yes, of course “both sides” do this. But the problem is also with the consumers of media who can’t abide civil and thoughtful argument, but prefer sound bites of deploring and denunciation.

    Here’s something to think about: What gives a better format for cogent argumentation, talk radio or the 90-second newscast? Which is more likely to just report, “John Doe said (shocked tone) blah blah blah, and people are just outraged!”?

  • kerner

    J @33:

    That link IS funny. I have already forwarded it to a Muslim in the hope that he can submit new entries. The Muslim in the chef’s hat was my favorite. :)

  • kerner

    J @33:

    That link IS funny. I have already forwarded it to a Muslim in the hope that he can submit new entries. The Muslim in the chef’s hat was my favorite. :)

  • Dust

    Thanks J at 33, great link (hope that’s ok to say and does not reveal a deeply hidden fear of different sorts peoples and their dress) but you should not mock Porcell….it reveals a deeply hidden fear in you of those you do not understand, and besides Porcell is one of my favorites on this blog. My guess he enjoyed the pics too as he seems to have a good sense of humor….he just wouldn’t want you to know after snarking him?

  • Dust

    Thanks J at 33, great link (hope that’s ok to say and does not reveal a deeply hidden fear of different sorts peoples and their dress) but you should not mock Porcell….it reveals a deeply hidden fear in you of those you do not understand, and besides Porcell is one of my favorites on this blog. My guess he enjoyed the pics too as he seems to have a good sense of humor….he just wouldn’t want you to know after snarking him?

  • DonS

    The 1st Amendment, as is the case with each of the Bill of Rights, is merely a guarantee that the government will not infringe those enumerated rights. It is clear that NPR, and all media companies, have a right to ensure that their news employees maintain their established objectivity standards. For example, almost all media companies prohibit news reporters from making political contributions. So, constitutionally, NPR clearly had the right to fire Williams for violating its policy. Whether that policy was sufficiently clear in establishing those standards is an employment law issue, beyond the scope of this post. Williams has the right to litigate that policy if he believes that the firing was a breach of contract.

    Now, Williams has been expressing opinion for years on Fox News. Though the statement at issue was a little silly, it’s not clear how it crossed a line that many of his prior stated opinions did not cross. Nor was it a particularly egregious statement, so it’s funny that it gave cause for an immediate termination. It’s hard to see, for example, how it falls into anywhere near the category of the specific and reprehensible anti-Semitic remarks uttered and reinforced by Rick Sanchez, which forced his termination by CNN.

    As a public relations move, it was disastrous for NPR. It reinforced the impression that NPR is liberal and constrained by rigid notions of political correctness, two weeks prior to a heated election. Not smart. And the comments by NPR management, intimating that Williams is under the care of a therapist, were idiotic and insulting. Hopefully, this incident will provide political impetus to, once and for all, eliminate federal funding for this surplus dinosaur network.

  • DonS

    The 1st Amendment, as is the case with each of the Bill of Rights, is merely a guarantee that the government will not infringe those enumerated rights. It is clear that NPR, and all media companies, have a right to ensure that their news employees maintain their established objectivity standards. For example, almost all media companies prohibit news reporters from making political contributions. So, constitutionally, NPR clearly had the right to fire Williams for violating its policy. Whether that policy was sufficiently clear in establishing those standards is an employment law issue, beyond the scope of this post. Williams has the right to litigate that policy if he believes that the firing was a breach of contract.

    Now, Williams has been expressing opinion for years on Fox News. Though the statement at issue was a little silly, it’s not clear how it crossed a line that many of his prior stated opinions did not cross. Nor was it a particularly egregious statement, so it’s funny that it gave cause for an immediate termination. It’s hard to see, for example, how it falls into anywhere near the category of the specific and reprehensible anti-Semitic remarks uttered and reinforced by Rick Sanchez, which forced his termination by CNN.

    As a public relations move, it was disastrous for NPR. It reinforced the impression that NPR is liberal and constrained by rigid notions of political correctness, two weeks prior to a heated election. Not smart. And the comments by NPR management, intimating that Williams is under the care of a therapist, were idiotic and insulting. Hopefully, this incident will provide political impetus to, once and for all, eliminate federal funding for this surplus dinosaur network.

  • SAL

    I assume NPR will act in a consistent fashion and fire Nina Tottenberg for also expressing controversial opinions on “Inside Washington”.

    Actually that’s unlikely.

    Back in 1995 Tottenberg wished on air that Jesse Helms would get AIDS, NPR didn’t choose to enforce its policy against controversial opinions then.

    NPR is rather selective in what controversial opinions are tolerated and which are not.

    I’m glad this came during a fund drive as I’ve made clear to my local affiliates (WLRH, WQPR) that they’ll not receive donations from me this year. Apparently in my region of the country there were quite a few conservative/moderate listeners of NPR who were extremely disappointed by the hypocrisy of firing Juan Williams.

  • SAL

    I assume NPR will act in a consistent fashion and fire Nina Tottenberg for also expressing controversial opinions on “Inside Washington”.

    Actually that’s unlikely.

    Back in 1995 Tottenberg wished on air that Jesse Helms would get AIDS, NPR didn’t choose to enforce its policy against controversial opinions then.

    NPR is rather selective in what controversial opinions are tolerated and which are not.

    I’m glad this came during a fund drive as I’ve made clear to my local affiliates (WLRH, WQPR) that they’ll not receive donations from me this year. Apparently in my region of the country there were quite a few conservative/moderate listeners of NPR who were extremely disappointed by the hypocrisy of firing Juan Williams.

  • SAL

    I’ll continue to listen to This American Life, Car Talk, BBC World Service, World Cafe, Snap Judgment, Talk of the Nation, and All Things Considered. I may even donate to my local stations next year.

    Culturally I can’t find anything as interesting as NPR on the other radio stations however that ought not to excuse them when they selectively enforce their journalist standards.

  • SAL

    I’ll continue to listen to This American Life, Car Talk, BBC World Service, World Cafe, Snap Judgment, Talk of the Nation, and All Things Considered. I may even donate to my local stations next year.

    Culturally I can’t find anything as interesting as NPR on the other radio stations however that ought not to excuse them when they selectively enforce their journalist standards.

  • DonS

    This Michael Barone article puts things into perspective pretty well, positing, with some authority, that NPR was forced to fire Williams because of the intolerance of its own audience.

    It seems today that it is generally the so-called “liberal” who is the least tolerant, smug, and snarky person in the room.

  • DonS

    This Michael Barone article puts things into perspective pretty well, positing, with some authority, that NPR was forced to fire Williams because of the intolerance of its own audience.

    It seems today that it is generally the so-called “liberal” who is the least tolerant, smug, and snarky person in the room.

  • Grace

    DonS – 42

    “It seems today that it is generally the so-called “liberal” who is the least tolerant, smug, and snarky person in the room.”

    HEAR, HEAR!

  • Grace

    DonS – 42

    “It seems today that it is generally the so-called “liberal” who is the least tolerant, smug, and snarky person in the room.”

    HEAR, HEAR!

  • Tom Hering

    DonS @ 42, as to we liberals being intolerant, I really think you should stop saying offensive things like that. As to we liberals being smug, I think our superiority gives us every right to be. As to we liberals being snarky …

  • Tom Hering

    DonS @ 42, as to we liberals being intolerant, I really think you should stop saying offensive things like that. As to we liberals being smug, I think our superiority gives us every right to be. As to we liberals being snarky …

  • mark†

    As I understand it, Rick Sanchez said the Jews run the entertainment industry. Helen Thomas said the Jews should leave Israel and go back to where they came from. Juan Williams said he was not a bigot, that he felt nervous when he saw someone on a plane in Muslim garb and that it was not right to say that all Muslims were terrorists. The liberals see these three statements as equivalent. I don’t. Could someone explain my failing, other than the obvious, that I am a conservative and hence stupid.

  • mark†

    As I understand it, Rick Sanchez said the Jews run the entertainment industry. Helen Thomas said the Jews should leave Israel and go back to where they came from. Juan Williams said he was not a bigot, that he felt nervous when he saw someone on a plane in Muslim garb and that it was not right to say that all Muslims were terrorists. The liberals see these three statements as equivalent. I don’t. Could someone explain my failing, other than the obvious, that I am a conservative and hence stupid.

  • Tom Hering

    Mark+ @ 45. As a liberal, whose heart bleeds for you and others with your disability (conservatism), I’m more than happy to explain your failing. The equivalence is in saying something – as a journalist under contract – that your employer sees as violating their standards.

    No need to thank me. :-)

  • Tom Hering

    Mark+ @ 45. As a liberal, whose heart bleeds for you and others with your disability (conservatism), I’m more than happy to explain your failing. The equivalence is in saying something – as a journalist under contract – that your employer sees as violating their standards.

    No need to thank me. :-)

  • Tom Hering

    Oops. I meant to say you are differently-abled as a conservative. Sorry.

  • Tom Hering

    Oops. I meant to say you are differently-abled as a conservative. Sorry.

  • helen

    the local pbs is my alarm clock; it’s also fundraising this week so i haven’t listened to most of this
    it would seem that npr should have had a clear agreement with williams when he started moonlighting at Fox
    was he there to give the impression that npr represented all points of view? if so, they blew it!

  • helen

    the local pbs is my alarm clock; it’s also fundraising this week so i haven’t listened to most of this
    it would seem that npr should have had a clear agreement with williams when he started moonlighting at Fox
    was he there to give the impression that npr represented all points of view? if so, they blew it!

  • kerner

    Please Tom @47. We conservatives are not handicapped. We are handi-capable!!! :) :) :)

    As, hopefully, we will demonstrate on Nov. 2.

  • kerner

    Please Tom @47. We conservatives are not handicapped. We are handi-capable!!! :) :) :)

    As, hopefully, we will demonstrate on Nov. 2.

  • Tom Hering

    kerner @ 49, you’re holding a demonstration on November 2? Cool. Can I come and counter-demonstrate? Do I have to wear something silly? Can I bring Al Sharpton?

  • Tom Hering

    kerner @ 49, you’re holding a demonstration on November 2? Cool. Can I come and counter-demonstrate? Do I have to wear something silly? Can I bring Al Sharpton?

  • Tom Hering

    helen @ 48, part of the problem with Williams on FOX News is he was always referred to as “Juan Williams of NPR.” It gave the impression that he was representing NPR, when he was only there as an employee of FOX (too). It also gave the impression that he was there as the “liberal balance” – credentialed by his employment at NPR. Now, NPR doesn’t want to be seen as exclusively liberal (they repeatedly assert), hence, the problem with the impression Williams created on FOX News. A problem that NPR has had with Williams for years. His garbophobia was just the straw that broke the camel’s back (apropo).

  • Tom Hering

    helen @ 48, part of the problem with Williams on FOX News is he was always referred to as “Juan Williams of NPR.” It gave the impression that he was representing NPR, when he was only there as an employee of FOX (too). It also gave the impression that he was there as the “liberal balance” – credentialed by his employment at NPR. Now, NPR doesn’t want to be seen as exclusively liberal (they repeatedly assert), hence, the problem with the impression Williams created on FOX News. A problem that NPR has had with Williams for years. His garbophobia was just the straw that broke the camel’s back (apropo).

  • Tom Hering

    Wait. “Garbophobia” would be a fear of Greta Garbo. That’s not what I meant. Though if Williams were a silent star, too, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

  • Tom Hering

    Wait. “Garbophobia” would be a fear of Greta Garbo. That’s not what I meant. Though if Williams were a silent star, too, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

  • Grace

    DonS – 39 – - – - “And the comments by NPR management, intimating that Williams is under the care of a therapist, were idiotic and insulting.” – -

    I agree, below is the the video. Williams can’t make a remark, but NPR can, and does – are they going to fire her as well?

    GATEWAY PUNDIT

    by Jim Hoft on Thursday, October 21, 2010, 3:25 PM
    Crackpot NPR CEO Vivian Schiller bashed Juan Williams today for his insensitive comments that Muslims attacked the US on 9-11 (Muslims did attack the US on 9-11) . This far left loon then not only insulted Juan Williams bust she also insulted anyone who seeks psychiatric help:

    “Juan Williams should have kept his feelings about Muslims between himself and his psychiatrist or his publicist.”

    http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/npr-ceo-juan-williams-views-should-stay-between-himself-and-his-psychiatrist-video/

    VIDEO INCLUDED

  • Grace

    DonS – 39 – - – - “And the comments by NPR management, intimating that Williams is under the care of a therapist, were idiotic and insulting.” – -

    I agree, below is the the video. Williams can’t make a remark, but NPR can, and does – are they going to fire her as well?

    GATEWAY PUNDIT

    by Jim Hoft on Thursday, October 21, 2010, 3:25 PM
    Crackpot NPR CEO Vivian Schiller bashed Juan Williams today for his insensitive comments that Muslims attacked the US on 9-11 (Muslims did attack the US on 9-11) . This far left loon then not only insulted Juan Williams bust she also insulted anyone who seeks psychiatric help:

    “Juan Williams should have kept his feelings about Muslims between himself and his psychiatrist or his publicist.”

    http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/npr-ceo-juan-williams-views-should-stay-between-himself-and-his-psychiatrist-video/

    VIDEO INCLUDED

  • Tom Hering

    I hadn’t heard about the “psychiatrist” crack until now. Pretty tame stuff, compared with Beck, Limbaugh, O’Reilly, et al. I guess liberals are incapable of striking at others with the same venom as conservatives. Darn. :-(

  • Tom Hering

    I hadn’t heard about the “psychiatrist” crack until now. Pretty tame stuff, compared with Beck, Limbaugh, O’Reilly, et al. I guess liberals are incapable of striking at others with the same venom as conservatives. Darn. :-(

  • SAL

    #51 Firing Williams over these tame remarks while permitting Nina Tottenberg to express liberal opinions in TV setting doesn’t help NPR’s case that it’s not exclusively liberal.

    NPR is exclusively liberal but that ought not to prevent them from doing better to strive for balance. This will hurt many public radio stations in conservative/moderate areas.

  • SAL

    #51 Firing Williams over these tame remarks while permitting Nina Tottenberg to express liberal opinions in TV setting doesn’t help NPR’s case that it’s not exclusively liberal.

    NPR is exclusively liberal but that ought not to prevent them from doing better to strive for balance. This will hurt many public radio stations in conservative/moderate areas.

  • Grace

    Sal, if people want NPR, then they cannot totally support it.

    “NPR is exclusively liberalbut that ought not to prevent them from doing better to strive for balance.”

    BALANCE?

    Liberal doesn’t do better, liberal just becomes more entrenched in the mire of hate against conservatives. Balance isn’t an option for the far left, anymore than captialism is an option for Obama.

  • Grace

    Sal, if people want NPR, then they cannot totally support it.

    “NPR is exclusively liberalbut that ought not to prevent them from doing better to strive for balance.”

    BALANCE?

    Liberal doesn’t do better, liberal just becomes more entrenched in the mire of hate against conservatives. Balance isn’t an option for the far left, anymore than captialism is an option for Obama.

  • Grace

    56 should read:

    Sal, if people want NPR, then they can totally support it.

  • Grace

    56 should read:

    Sal, if people want NPR, then they can totally support it.

  • Tom Hering

    Right. We wouldn’t want NPR receiving goodies from the government (taxpayers) the way private businesses, both large and small, do. (Consistent conservatives, of course, oppose the latter as well.)

  • Tom Hering

    Right. We wouldn’t want NPR receiving goodies from the government (taxpayers) the way private businesses, both large and small, do. (Consistent conservatives, of course, oppose the latter as well.)

  • mark†

    Tom Herring. My congratulations Sir. You are a master of deflection.

  • mark†

    Tom Herring. My congratulations Sir. You are a master of deflection.

  • Grace

    Tom,

    This couldn’t have come at a better moment, just DAYS before an election – in which American citizens, FED UP with soci@@@@lism to there foreheads, can finally unload the far left from the House, and perhaps be a loud voice in the Senate.

    All the Oba (definition: African ruler: a ruler among the Yoruba people of West Africa) ideas, brought to the House and Senate floor can be used as so much bathroom paper. Perhaps we can finally stop the flow of money being torpedoed out the windows of Washington.

  • Grace

    Tom,

    This couldn’t have come at a better moment, just DAYS before an election – in which American citizens, FED UP with soci@@@@lism to there foreheads, can finally unload the far left from the House, and perhaps be a loud voice in the Senate.

    All the Oba (definition: African ruler: a ruler among the Yoruba people of West Africa) ideas, brought to the House and Senate floor can be used as so much bathroom paper. Perhaps we can finally stop the flow of money being torpedoed out the windows of Washington.

  • Tom Hering

    Hmm. I thought I was tossing ‘em right back at ya’ll. Maybe you keep shifting.

  • Tom Hering

    Hmm. I thought I was tossing ‘em right back at ya’ll. Maybe you keep shifting.

  • Tom Hering

    “All the Oba (definition: African ruler: a ruler among the Yoruba people of West Africa) ideas, brought to the House and Senate floor ..”

    Yes, yes, I know. The president should never have made his State of the Union speech in a grass skirt. And the bone through his nose was just too much. He should at least leave the spear in the Oval Office next time. Ugh.

  • Tom Hering

    “All the Oba (definition: African ruler: a ruler among the Yoruba people of West Africa) ideas, brought to the House and Senate floor ..”

    Yes, yes, I know. The president should never have made his State of the Union speech in a grass skirt. And the bone through his nose was just too much. He should at least leave the spear in the Oval Office next time. Ugh.

  • Grace

    NOPE, we’re standing our ground – Maybe you’re nervous just like Oba ……. he shifts just like his teleprompter

  • Grace

    NOPE, we’re standing our ground – Maybe you’re nervous just like Oba ……. he shifts just like his teleprompter

  • Grace

    Tom

    “Ugh.”

    LOL – maybe a hot glass of milk might help ya Tom.

  • Grace

    Tom

    “Ugh.”

    LOL – maybe a hot glass of milk might help ya Tom.

  • Tom Hering

    What? Me nervous? It’s not like my hands are shaking too much to type comments. Though my spleen seems a bit overactive …

  • Tom Hering

    What? Me nervous? It’s not like my hands are shaking too much to type comments. Though my spleen seems a bit overactive …

  • Grace

    Funding Under Fire After Williams Ouster

    Published October 21, 2010 FoxNews.com

    News analyst Juan Williams’ firing from National Public Radio for comments he made about being nervous when flying alongside devout Muslims has sparked a public outcry that includes calls for investigations and a cut in public funding to the broadcaster.

    “I think the U.S. Congress should investigate NPR and consider cutting off their money,” said Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is also a Fox News contributor

    another excerpt~~~~

    “I think the whole idea that if you honestly say how you feel about Islam — what he said was very balanced, people should read what he actually said — the idea that that’s the excuse for National Public Radio to censor Juan Williams is an outrage and every listener of NPR should be enraged that there’s this kind of bias against an American,” Gingrich said.

    But Williams has won considerable support from media figures and lawmakers. The hosts of ABC’s “The View,” whose raucous interview with O’Reilly last week sparked a weeklong back-and-forth about making a distinction between Muslims and Islamic extremists, said NPR was wrong to let Williams go.

    “I don’t think he should have been fired, because, in fact … lots of people have this idea,” said host Whoopi Goldberg.

    Host Barbara Walters said Williams perhaps should have been chastised, not fired because he was on the show to give his perspective.

    “I think they were very wrong,” she said of NPR.

    Republican Rep. Peter King went further, calling on Congress to nix any federal money NPR gets “because of its indefensible bias.”

    “NPR has disgraced itself by caving into CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and by firing Juan Williams for exercising his right of free speech,” he said. “This is political correctness carried to its extreme form.”

    Another excerpt~~~~

    In June, Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., introduced legislation to end taxpayer funding of PBS and NPR — a bill that he says would save taxpayers about $450 million each year. But the bill has been largely ignored and gone nowhere.

    The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the parent company of PBS and NPR, received $420 million in taxpayer funds in 2010 and has requested $608 million for the next funding cycle that begins in 2013.

    NPR says government funding makes up less than 2 percent of it budget, with the rest coming from station fees, sponsorships and grants. This week, the radio network received $1.8 million from billionaire investor George Soros to hire journalists to cover legislatures in all 50 states.

    The Council on American-Islamic Relations had urged NPR to take swift action against Williams.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/21/npr-seeks-defuse-uproar-williams-firing-critics-congress-defund-network/

    NOTE:

    Anyone can chirp: “It’s only 2%” – 420 million taxpayer funds is a lot of money, this country can’t afford every so called “its only 2%” therefore it is a credible request – and then they want more, to the tune of 608 million –

    Yep, Oba has his supporters -

  • Grace

    Funding Under Fire After Williams Ouster

    Published October 21, 2010 FoxNews.com

    News analyst Juan Williams’ firing from National Public Radio for comments he made about being nervous when flying alongside devout Muslims has sparked a public outcry that includes calls for investigations and a cut in public funding to the broadcaster.

    “I think the U.S. Congress should investigate NPR and consider cutting off their money,” said Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who is also a Fox News contributor

    another excerpt~~~~

    “I think the whole idea that if you honestly say how you feel about Islam — what he said was very balanced, people should read what he actually said — the idea that that’s the excuse for National Public Radio to censor Juan Williams is an outrage and every listener of NPR should be enraged that there’s this kind of bias against an American,” Gingrich said.

    But Williams has won considerable support from media figures and lawmakers. The hosts of ABC’s “The View,” whose raucous interview with O’Reilly last week sparked a weeklong back-and-forth about making a distinction between Muslims and Islamic extremists, said NPR was wrong to let Williams go.

    “I don’t think he should have been fired, because, in fact … lots of people have this idea,” said host Whoopi Goldberg.

    Host Barbara Walters said Williams perhaps should have been chastised, not fired because he was on the show to give his perspective.

    “I think they were very wrong,” she said of NPR.

    Republican Rep. Peter King went further, calling on Congress to nix any federal money NPR gets “because of its indefensible bias.”

    “NPR has disgraced itself by caving into CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and by firing Juan Williams for exercising his right of free speech,” he said. “This is political correctness carried to its extreme form.”

    Another excerpt~~~~

    In June, Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., introduced legislation to end taxpayer funding of PBS and NPR — a bill that he says would save taxpayers about $450 million each year. But the bill has been largely ignored and gone nowhere.

    The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the parent company of PBS and NPR, received $420 million in taxpayer funds in 2010 and has requested $608 million for the next funding cycle that begins in 2013.

    NPR says government funding makes up less than 2 percent of it budget, with the rest coming from station fees, sponsorships and grants. This week, the radio network received $1.8 million from billionaire investor George Soros to hire journalists to cover legislatures in all 50 states.

    The Council on American-Islamic Relations had urged NPR to take swift action against Williams.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/21/npr-seeks-defuse-uproar-williams-firing-critics-congress-defund-network/

    NOTE:

    Anyone can chirp: “It’s only 2%” – 420 million taxpayer funds is a lot of money, this country can’t afford every so called “its only 2%” therefore it is a credible request – and then they want more, to the tune of 608 million –

    Yep, Oba has his supporters -

  • Tom Hering

    Holy cow! This is more serious than I thought! Newt Gingrich is now calling for public broadcasting funds to be cut off! Oh wait. He’s only been doing that since the mid-1990s. But wait again! Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters have doubts! Surely the Apocalypse is at hand.

    Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen.

  • Tom Hering

    Holy cow! This is more serious than I thought! Newt Gingrich is now calling for public broadcasting funds to be cut off! Oh wait. He’s only been doing that since the mid-1990s. But wait again! Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters have doubts! Surely the Apocalypse is at hand.

    Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen.

  • kerner

    Tom @50

    We are not holding any special demonstration on Nov. 2. We are voting. And of course you can come, and you can wear something silly, but you can’t bring Al Sharpton, because he votes in New York. ;)

  • kerner

    Tom @50

    We are not holding any special demonstration on Nov. 2. We are voting. And of course you can come, and you can wear something silly, but you can’t bring Al Sharpton, because he votes in New York. ;)

  • Tom Hering

    “… you can’t bring Al Sharpton, because he votes in New York.” – kerner @ 68.

    Yeah, like that ever stopped anyone from voting (twice) somewhere else. Heck, even the dead rise from their graves to vote in some cities.

    Happy Halloween. :-)

  • Tom Hering

    “… you can’t bring Al Sharpton, because he votes in New York.” – kerner @ 68.

    Yeah, like that ever stopped anyone from voting (twice) somewhere else. Heck, even the dead rise from their graves to vote in some cities.

    Happy Halloween. :-)

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen.”
    LOL
    I am glad I wasn’t sipping my soda. I would have ruined the computer!

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen.”
    LOL
    I am glad I wasn’t sipping my soda. I would have ruined the computer!

  • Grace

    sg – 70

    Tom“Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen.”
    LOL

    sg – I am glad I wasn’t sipping my soda. I would have ruined the computer!”

    sg, I wouldn’t expect much from Tom, …. but YOU finding his comment amusing ? – making fun of the LORD’s coming?

    We attended a Bible study within the PCUSA for a very short time, they made a habit of irreverent comments, it too was a revelation as to their depth.

  • Grace

    sg – 70

    Tom“Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen.”
    LOL

    sg – I am glad I wasn’t sipping my soda. I would have ruined the computer!”

    sg, I wouldn’t expect much from Tom, …. but YOU finding his comment amusing ? – making fun of the LORD’s coming?

    We attended a Bible study within the PCUSA for a very short time, they made a habit of irreverent comments, it too was a revelation as to their depth.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Part of humor is the unexpected.

    Tom is making fun of those who are acting like the world is coming to an end.

    But hey, fine, I guess it was irreverent.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Part of humor is the unexpected.

    Tom is making fun of those who are acting like the world is coming to an end.

    But hey, fine, I guess it was irreverent.

  • Grace

    sg

    >blockquote>”Tom is making fun of those who are acting like the world is coming to an end. But hey, fine, I guess it was irreverent. ”

    NO – Tom was speaking of “material” –

    TOM POSTED……. “Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen. LOL”

    Why would any Believer join those who make fun of the LORD’s return? – the return of our LORD and Savior will be the biggest event since He ascended to heaven, after dying and resurrecting from the grave. What greater Holy event do we as Believers wait for?

    “As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”

    That is a sobering thought, both for the Believer and for those who laugh, and think in nothing more than a joke.

  • Grace

    sg

    >blockquote>”Tom is making fun of those who are acting like the world is coming to an end. But hey, fine, I guess it was irreverent. ”

    NO – Tom was speaking of “material” –

    TOM POSTED……. “Come quickly, Lord. The 24/7 news cycle needs material. Amen. LOL”

    Why would any Believer join those who make fun of the LORD’s return? – the return of our LORD and Savior will be the biggest event since He ascended to heaven, after dying and resurrecting from the grave. What greater Holy event do we as Believers wait for?

    “As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”

    That is a sobering thought, both for the Believer and for those who laugh, and think in nothing more than a joke.

  • trotk

    Grace @ # 34:

    “The offended be it Muslims, liberals, homosexuals, those of color, it matters little, they believe their rights surpass any belief others may have. SILENCE should be maintained at all times, IF our views contradict their behavior or beliefs.”

    And of course, Grace, you believe that your beliefs surpass their rights.

    I am not arguing with you about freedom of expression, but after reading many of your comments that touch on people who are different than you, it has become clear to me that what you ultimately want is a society where everyone looks, talks, and acts just like you. Those who are different, those who have done wrong, those who are untrustworthy – these you cannot abide, and you certainly don’t love them.

    Grace, Christ spent all his time with those people. The people he rejected were the ones like you, who adopted an attitude of holiness. He loved, and commanded us to love, the dregs of society.

  • trotk

    Grace @ # 34:

    “The offended be it Muslims, liberals, homosexuals, those of color, it matters little, they believe their rights surpass any belief others may have. SILENCE should be maintained at all times, IF our views contradict their behavior or beliefs.”

    And of course, Grace, you believe that your beliefs surpass their rights.

    I am not arguing with you about freedom of expression, but after reading many of your comments that touch on people who are different than you, it has become clear to me that what you ultimately want is a society where everyone looks, talks, and acts just like you. Those who are different, those who have done wrong, those who are untrustworthy – these you cannot abide, and you certainly don’t love them.

    Grace, Christ spent all his time with those people. The people he rejected were the ones like you, who adopted an attitude of holiness. He loved, and commanded us to love, the dregs of society.

  • Tom Hering

    “… I wouldn’t expect much from Tom …” – Grace @ 71.

    I would hope not! What with my soft heart and all, I might actually feel compelled to try and meet your expectations. Which would end with me turning to booze, and roaming the streets all night, and being admitted to a psych ward …

    So please keep telling me I disappoint you. It’s my comfort zone. Thanks. ;-)

  • Tom Hering

    “… I wouldn’t expect much from Tom …” – Grace @ 71.

    I would hope not! What with my soft heart and all, I might actually feel compelled to try and meet your expectations. Which would end with me turning to booze, and roaming the streets all night, and being admitted to a psych ward …

    So please keep telling me I disappoint you. It’s my comfort zone. Thanks. ;-)

  • Grace

    74 trotk

    You are posting regarding my post 34.

    YOU WRITE:

    ” Those who are different, those who have done wrong, those who are untrustworthy – these you cannot abide, and you certainly don’t love them.”

    NOOOOOOOO, the problem has been brought to LIGHT since 9-11.

    Those who have harmed the citizens of this country, using their religion as a scape goat, to do so …… is foolish. It’s not a matter of loving them, it is making sure they they cannot do it again.

    I can and do love everyone, but TRUST? – - now you have a different dialogue…….. another subject.

    trotk, unravel your debating skills, whatever they might be.

  • Grace

    74 trotk

    You are posting regarding my post 34.

    YOU WRITE:

    ” Those who are different, those who have done wrong, those who are untrustworthy – these you cannot abide, and you certainly don’t love them.”

    NOOOOOOOO, the problem has been brought to LIGHT since 9-11.

    Those who have harmed the citizens of this country, using their religion as a scape goat, to do so …… is foolish. It’s not a matter of loving them, it is making sure they they cannot do it again.

    I can and do love everyone, but TRUST? – - now you have a different dialogue…….. another subject.

    trotk, unravel your debating skills, whatever they might be.

  • Grace

    Tom – 75

    Spoken like a true cry baby!

  • Grace

    Tom – 75

    Spoken like a true cry baby!

  • Tom Hering

    “Spoken like a true cry baby!” – Grace @ 77.

    Thank you for complying with my request that you continue to have a low view of me. I can rest well tonight. All snuggled up with my little blue blanky.

  • Tom Hering

    “Spoken like a true cry baby!” – Grace @ 77.

    Thank you for complying with my request that you continue to have a low view of me. I can rest well tonight. All snuggled up with my little blue blanky.

  • Tom Hering

    Good night, Grace. May God bless you. +

  • Tom Hering

    Good night, Grace. May God bless you. +

  • Grace

    Tom – 75

    “I would hope not! What with my soft heart and all, I might actually feel compelled to try and meet your expectations. Which would end with me turning to booze, and roaming the streets all night, and being admitted to a psych ward”

    I have nothing to do with the bad or good choices you choose to make…… whatever they might be.

    Again, your excuses for who you are, or what you might become or do, ….. are your’s alone, the responsibility lies with you.

  • Grace

    Tom – 75

    “I would hope not! What with my soft heart and all, I might actually feel compelled to try and meet your expectations. Which would end with me turning to booze, and roaming the streets all night, and being admitted to a psych ward”

    I have nothing to do with the bad or good choices you choose to make…… whatever they might be.

    Again, your excuses for who you are, or what you might become or do, ….. are your’s alone, the responsibility lies with you.

  • Tom Hering

    Good morning, Grace. :-)

    “… the responsibility lies with you.” – Grace @ 80, around midnight.

    So that is what spent the night in bed with me. Responsibility-for-myself. No wonder my sleep was fitful.

    Responsibility-for-myself doesn’t look so good in the morning, either, let me tell you. She starts the day nagging me with all sorts of demands. Of course, I just say “Yes, dear” and get on with things as quick as I can.

    Oh well, she’s a shrew, ’tis true. But we’re stuck with each other. C’est la vie. Time to turn on the radio and listen to NPR sans Juan Williams. :-)

  • Tom Hering

    Good morning, Grace. :-)

    “… the responsibility lies with you.” – Grace @ 80, around midnight.

    So that is what spent the night in bed with me. Responsibility-for-myself. No wonder my sleep was fitful.

    Responsibility-for-myself doesn’t look so good in the morning, either, let me tell you. She starts the day nagging me with all sorts of demands. Of course, I just say “Yes, dear” and get on with things as quick as I can.

    Oh well, she’s a shrew, ’tis true. But we’re stuck with each other. C’est la vie. Time to turn on the radio and listen to NPR sans Juan Williams. :-)

  • fws

    “That is to say, if people lose their jobs for stating their opinion, do we really have free speech?”

    Yes.

    McDonalds Checker “I am a (fill in the blank) and think you will go to hell if you dont believe in (fill in the blank). Enjoy your fries! Have a nice day! (insert happy face here).

    Free speach right?

    Opinion columnists are not the same as journalists. And granted, no new org, not fox, not npr or nbc or cnn or…. is unbiased and enforces their internal policies consistently.

    Alternative? Force NPR or FOX to allow their staff to say whatever they feel like saying on the air?

    This is what you are suggesting would be “free speach”. Ahem.

  • fws

    “That is to say, if people lose their jobs for stating their opinion, do we really have free speech?”

    Yes.

    McDonalds Checker “I am a (fill in the blank) and think you will go to hell if you dont believe in (fill in the blank). Enjoy your fries! Have a nice day! (insert happy face here).

    Free speach right?

    Opinion columnists are not the same as journalists. And granted, no new org, not fox, not npr or nbc or cnn or…. is unbiased and enforces their internal policies consistently.

    Alternative? Force NPR or FOX to allow their staff to say whatever they feel like saying on the air?

    This is what you are suggesting would be “free speach”. Ahem.

  • fws

    tom @ 81

    I am reading Grace now as a sort of a Monty Python parody. It´s really sort of entertaining. try it.

    A witness at a civic event to publicly burn a witch at the stake ( a gathering of the spiritual forefathers of Calvary Chapel): “she turned me into a newt!”

    Everyone staring at him (he looks normal): “Well….. it got bettah!”

  • fws

    tom @ 81

    I am reading Grace now as a sort of a Monty Python parody. It´s really sort of entertaining. try it.

    A witness at a civic event to publicly burn a witch at the stake ( a gathering of the spiritual forefathers of Calvary Chapel): “she turned me into a newt!”

    Everyone staring at him (he looks normal): “Well….. it got bettah!”

  • Porcell

    Trotk He loved, and commanded us to love, the dregs of society.

    True, though he, also, made clear that he came to fulfill the law and had no intention to abrogate it. He advised the adulterer … to go and sin no more

    The confused, slender-minded antimonians on this site lack lack Grace’s clarity regarding the law. They might, as FWS does, cruelly and arrogantly regard Grace as a Monty Python parody, though she has the better of the argument both logically and spiritually.

  • Porcell

    Trotk He loved, and commanded us to love, the dregs of society.

    True, though he, also, made clear that he came to fulfill the law and had no intention to abrogate it. He advised the adulterer … to go and sin no more

    The confused, slender-minded antimonians on this site lack lack Grace’s clarity regarding the law. They might, as FWS does, cruelly and arrogantly regard Grace as a Monty Python parody, though she has the better of the argument both logically and spiritually.

  • Porcell

    As to the Juan Williams matter, how delightful it is that NPR has been mostly excoriated for its crude position on Juan Williams honest statement of his views. Also, Nina Totenberg and Cokie Roberts have been delightfully brought to task for their snarky remarks on conservatives that went unremarked by the NPR liberal ideologues.

    How remarkable it is that NPR is now in danger of losing its government financing, while Juan Williams walks to the bank with a two $million dollar contract.

  • Porcell

    As to the Juan Williams matter, how delightful it is that NPR has been mostly excoriated for its crude position on Juan Williams honest statement of his views. Also, Nina Totenberg and Cokie Roberts have been delightfully brought to task for their snarky remarks on conservatives that went unremarked by the NPR liberal ideologues.

    How remarkable it is that NPR is now in danger of losing its government financing, while Juan Williams walks to the bank with a two $million dollar contract.

  • Tom Hering

    “I am reading Grace now as a sort of a Monty Python parody. It´s really sort of entertaining. try it.” – fws @ 83.

    I’m game!

    SCENE: Interior. Office. Ministry of Silly Walks of Faith.

    Man enters.

    MINISTER: (seated behind desk) “Hello! May I be of assistance?”

    MAN: “Well, yes – I suppose so. I’m having a bit of a problem with my walk of faith.”

    MINISTER: “I see! Tell me, what is the nature of the problem, precisely?”

    MAN: (reluctantly) “Well …”

    MINISTER: “Oh come now! Don’t be shy. We’re all very good friends here.”

    MAN: “Well, I can’t seem to – you know – walk the walk.”

    MINISTER: “Oh my! My my my! You’re on your way to Hell, aren’t you? You’re a filthy, cheeky bastard who ought to squirm in flames forever! Right? Right?”

    MAN: (meekly) “I don’t think so …”

    MINISTER: “Please! I know your type! Running around pretending to be a Christian and all. ‘Oh look at me! I was baptized as an infant!’ Nonsense! Utter rubbish! We don’t take very kindly to babies splashing about in sanctuaries. Not in this office! I can tell you that.”

    MAN: (agitated) “Oh dear. What should I do then? Can you help me?”

    MINISTER: (getting up) “You’re very nearly damned forever, but I think we can set things going in the proper direction. Now, step over here” (points to a diagram of dotted lines and shoe prints, painted on the floor beside the desk) “and follow along.”

    MAN: “What?’

    MINISTER: (extending both arms in an invitation to dance) “Come on!”

    MAN: “But I hardly know you!”

    MINISTER: “Doesn’t matter. Here, take my hand, and put your other hand behind my back. There! Ready?”

    MAN: “I feel silly.”

    MINISTER: “Why, yes, of course you do. We haven’t been properly introduced. I’m Mr. Law. But you can call me Grace.”

    MAN: “Grace? I don’t know – that sounds a touch odd to me.”

    MINISTER: “Look here! We’re never going to get you walking the walk if you insist that names and teachings and such can be incorrect!”

    MAN: “Maybe I ought to come back another time.”

    MINISTER: “Another time? Another time? Fine! Go on then – get out! But don’t come crying to me when the devils are poking your arse with pitchforks and rubber spatulas!”

    MAN: “Rubber spatulas?”

    MINISTER: “Yes! Rubber spatulas! Like to know more about that, wouldn’t you? Too late! Had your chance! Go on! Leave!”

    MAN: (pulling door closed as he exits) “Sorry to trouble you.”

    MINISTER: (seated back behind desk, head in hands) “Bloody Lutherans …”

  • Tom Hering

    “I am reading Grace now as a sort of a Monty Python parody. It´s really sort of entertaining. try it.” – fws @ 83.

    I’m game!

    SCENE: Interior. Office. Ministry of Silly Walks of Faith.

    Man enters.

    MINISTER: (seated behind desk) “Hello! May I be of assistance?”

    MAN: “Well, yes – I suppose so. I’m having a bit of a problem with my walk of faith.”

    MINISTER: “I see! Tell me, what is the nature of the problem, precisely?”

    MAN: (reluctantly) “Well …”

    MINISTER: “Oh come now! Don’t be shy. We’re all very good friends here.”

    MAN: “Well, I can’t seem to – you know – walk the walk.”

    MINISTER: “Oh my! My my my! You’re on your way to Hell, aren’t you? You’re a filthy, cheeky bastard who ought to squirm in flames forever! Right? Right?”

    MAN: (meekly) “I don’t think so …”

    MINISTER: “Please! I know your type! Running around pretending to be a Christian and all. ‘Oh look at me! I was baptized as an infant!’ Nonsense! Utter rubbish! We don’t take very kindly to babies splashing about in sanctuaries. Not in this office! I can tell you that.”

    MAN: (agitated) “Oh dear. What should I do then? Can you help me?”

    MINISTER: (getting up) “You’re very nearly damned forever, but I think we can set things going in the proper direction. Now, step over here” (points to a diagram of dotted lines and shoe prints, painted on the floor beside the desk) “and follow along.”

    MAN: “What?’

    MINISTER: (extending both arms in an invitation to dance) “Come on!”

    MAN: “But I hardly know you!”

    MINISTER: “Doesn’t matter. Here, take my hand, and put your other hand behind my back. There! Ready?”

    MAN: “I feel silly.”

    MINISTER: “Why, yes, of course you do. We haven’t been properly introduced. I’m Mr. Law. But you can call me Grace.”

    MAN: “Grace? I don’t know – that sounds a touch odd to me.”

    MINISTER: “Look here! We’re never going to get you walking the walk if you insist that names and teachings and such can be incorrect!”

    MAN: “Maybe I ought to come back another time.”

    MINISTER: “Another time? Another time? Fine! Go on then – get out! But don’t come crying to me when the devils are poking your arse with pitchforks and rubber spatulas!”

    MAN: “Rubber spatulas?”

    MINISTER: “Yes! Rubber spatulas! Like to know more about that, wouldn’t you? Too late! Had your chance! Go on! Leave!”

    MAN: (pulling door closed as he exits) “Sorry to trouble you.”

    MINISTER: (seated back behind desk, head in hands) “Bloody Lutherans …”

  • Dust

    Tom at 86….as they say in the business, don’t quit your day job son!

  • Dust

    Tom at 86….as they say in the business, don’t quit your day job son!

  • trotk

    Peter -

    Just because you are wholeheartedly conservative doesn’t mean you need to defend everyone who takes a conservative stance. It makes your arguments less meaningful when you defend bad arguments and antipathy toward whole races in general.

    In the last view weeks, Grace has vilified all Muslims, all Latinos, all Hispanics, all Germans, most immigrants, all homosexuals, Martin Luther, all those on the left, and everyone else who doesn’t agree with her politically or spiritually, or in whatever way she feels important for that day. I am probably missing a few.

    And her criticism never sounds like Christ’s “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.” Instead, it always sounds like, “I condemn your entire group because of the actions of a few. You deserve the worst, and you should have no rights or privileges.

    Christ, the same one who may or may not have uttered that statement in John 8 (it isn’t in any of the oldest manuscripts we have, and so it is a dangerous passage to build any argument on), ate with the people that Grace would condemn because of their color, race, sin, beliefs, etc.

    Don’t defend the indefensible. She already sounds just like a Pharisee. You are in danger of joining her there.

  • trotk

    Peter -

    Just because you are wholeheartedly conservative doesn’t mean you need to defend everyone who takes a conservative stance. It makes your arguments less meaningful when you defend bad arguments and antipathy toward whole races in general.

    In the last view weeks, Grace has vilified all Muslims, all Latinos, all Hispanics, all Germans, most immigrants, all homosexuals, Martin Luther, all those on the left, and everyone else who doesn’t agree with her politically or spiritually, or in whatever way she feels important for that day. I am probably missing a few.

    And her criticism never sounds like Christ’s “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.” Instead, it always sounds like, “I condemn your entire group because of the actions of a few. You deserve the worst, and you should have no rights or privileges.

    Christ, the same one who may or may not have uttered that statement in John 8 (it isn’t in any of the oldest manuscripts we have, and so it is a dangerous passage to build any argument on), ate with the people that Grace would condemn because of their color, race, sin, beliefs, etc.

    Don’t defend the indefensible. She already sounds just like a Pharisee. You are in danger of joining her there.

  • Tom Hering

    Dust @ 87, I won’t. And thanks for the advice. Your successes in the business would include …?

  • Tom Hering

    Dust @ 87, I won’t. And thanks for the advice. Your successes in the business would include …?

  • Grace

    trotk – 88

    “In the last view weeks, Grace has vilified all Muslims, all Latinos, all Hispanics, all Germans, most immigrants, all homosexuals, Martin Luther, all those on the left, and everyone else who doesn’t agree with her politically or spiritually, or in whatever way she feels important for that day.” –

    ALL covers just about everyone – ….. everytime I hear or read something like the above gibberish, it is no different, than listening to a child say “ALL the kids in school…….”

    As with children, you hope they will grow up – but alas, that doesn’t always take place.

    For the rest:

    14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

    15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
    Matthew 10

    Jesus preached and taught the people He came in contact with. As He talked to the woman at the well, she believed in Him right away. Jesus talked to Zaccchaes who believed in Him right away too. The problem people have today, is this, they believe Jesus kept running around with people who didn’t believe in Him,….. the passage above proves that idea to be wrong. Jesus didn’t run after anyone, they could either believe or disbelieve.

    19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.
    20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not: Matthew

    Jesus upbraided those who did not repent, they stayed in their sins -

  • Grace

    trotk – 88

    “In the last view weeks, Grace has vilified all Muslims, all Latinos, all Hispanics, all Germans, most immigrants, all homosexuals, Martin Luther, all those on the left, and everyone else who doesn’t agree with her politically or spiritually, or in whatever way she feels important for that day.” –

    ALL covers just about everyone – ….. everytime I hear or read something like the above gibberish, it is no different, than listening to a child say “ALL the kids in school…….”

    As with children, you hope they will grow up – but alas, that doesn’t always take place.

    For the rest:

    14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

    15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
    Matthew 10

    Jesus preached and taught the people He came in contact with. As He talked to the woman at the well, she believed in Him right away. Jesus talked to Zaccchaes who believed in Him right away too. The problem people have today, is this, they believe Jesus kept running around with people who didn’t believe in Him,….. the passage above proves that idea to be wrong. Jesus didn’t run after anyone, they could either believe or disbelieve.

    19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.
    20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not: Matthew

    Jesus upbraided those who did not repent, they stayed in their sins -

  • Tom Hering

    “As with children, you hope they will grow up – but alas, that doesn’t always take place.” – Grace @ 90.

    And others, one hopes, may someday become more like little children. About whom we may hear the report, “Plays well with others. And stuck a bug up her nose. Which is an improvement over the bug that was stuck up …” :-O

  • Tom Hering

    “As with children, you hope they will grow up – but alas, that doesn’t always take place.” – Grace @ 90.

    And others, one hopes, may someday become more like little children. About whom we may hear the report, “Plays well with others. And stuck a bug up her nose. Which is an improvement over the bug that was stuck up …” :-O

  • trotk

    Grace, have you ever admit that you were wrong?

    Do you realize that the gospel you proclaim is one of works righteousness? Have you somehow managed to miss the fact that we can do nothing to earn God’s grace?
    Jesus has not asked you to have the particular role of condemning those who either have not heard of Him or who have failed to repent.
    Consider that He became sin to save. That was His fundamental act. His basic role on earth was that of a suffering servant who gave Himself up for those who rejected Him and failed Him. If you want to be like Him, the proper response is not to be a judge, but to be a servant and sacrifice.

    You perform the role of judge well, but remember that the chief accuser is Satan, not Christ.

  • trotk

    Grace, have you ever admit that you were wrong?

    Do you realize that the gospel you proclaim is one of works righteousness? Have you somehow managed to miss the fact that we can do nothing to earn God’s grace?
    Jesus has not asked you to have the particular role of condemning those who either have not heard of Him or who have failed to repent.
    Consider that He became sin to save. That was His fundamental act. His basic role on earth was that of a suffering servant who gave Himself up for those who rejected Him and failed Him. If you want to be like Him, the proper response is not to be a judge, but to be a servant and sacrifice.

    You perform the role of judge well, but remember that the chief accuser is Satan, not Christ.

  • Dust

    trotk….actually the biggest role Satan plays is tempter, not accuser as our conscience does that pretty well on its own. Having said that, it’s not hard to conceive of your last line to Grace as having a fair shade of judgement, could you see it in your heart that way? If not, that’s ok…..it’s not easy to be honest with ourselves, or of course, could be wrong in my opinion (er, judegment?) of your comment? Wow, this gets circular quickly, eh?

  • Dust

    trotk….actually the biggest role Satan plays is tempter, not accuser as our conscience does that pretty well on its own. Having said that, it’s not hard to conceive of your last line to Grace as having a fair shade of judgement, could you see it in your heart that way? If not, that’s ok…..it’s not easy to be honest with ourselves, or of course, could be wrong in my opinion (er, judegment?) of your comment? Wow, this gets circular quickly, eh?

  • Grace

    12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

    13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. 1 Corinthians 5

    Paul is making clear he isn’t judging those outside the church, or those who are un-Believers, but those who are INSIDE. Evil is to be judged within the church, or those who profess to Believe in Him and then live to the opposite.

    If a person is professing to be a believer, but their doctrine doesn’t line up with Scripture we can judge whether it be TRUE or FALSE – it’s not complicated.

  • Grace

    12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

    13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. 1 Corinthians 5

    Paul is making clear he isn’t judging those outside the church, or those who are un-Believers, but those who are INSIDE. Evil is to be judged within the church, or those who profess to Believe in Him and then live to the opposite.

    If a person is professing to be a believer, but their doctrine doesn’t line up with Scripture we can judge whether it be TRUE or FALSE – it’s not complicated.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    “If a person is professing to be a believer, but their doctrine doesn’t line up with Scripture we can judge whether it be TRUE or FALSE” (@94).

    For instance, say there’s a person who claims to be a “believer”, but their doctrine doesn’t line up with John 20:23?

    “It’s not complicated.”

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    “If a person is professing to be a believer, but their doctrine doesn’t line up with Scripture we can judge whether it be TRUE or FALSE” (@94).

    For instance, say there’s a person who claims to be a “believer”, but their doctrine doesn’t line up with John 20:23?

    “It’s not complicated.”

  • trotk

    Well played, tODD.

    Dust, I didn’t main a claim as to know the biggest role that Satan plays. I simply said he was the chief accuser. Which he is. Of course our conscience accuses us, but in the same way the Law does, which is as a tutor to lead us to Christ.

    Grace accuses as the devil does, which is to blame without hope of redemption. And yes, I am obviously casting judgment on her by doing so. I do it hesitantly, but I do so out of the hope that she will stop spending all of her time condemning those that aren’t like her.

  • trotk

    Well played, tODD.

    Dust, I didn’t main a claim as to know the biggest role that Satan plays. I simply said he was the chief accuser. Which he is. Of course our conscience accuses us, but in the same way the Law does, which is as a tutor to lead us to Christ.

    Grace accuses as the devil does, which is to blame without hope of redemption. And yes, I am obviously casting judgment on her by doing so. I do it hesitantly, but I do so out of the hope that she will stop spending all of her time condemning those that aren’t like her.

  • Carl Vehse

    According to a January 6, 20111, release, Review Of Juan Williams’ Firing Done; NPR News Exec Resigns, Senior Vice President for News Ellen Weiss, who fired Williams, has resigned.

    Also, because of her role in the firing (and possibly because of her claim that Williams “needed psychiatric help,”) NPR CEO Vivian Schiller will not receive a bonus this year. NPR’s winning a place on the PR Newswire’s Top 2010 PR Blunders list wasn’t a feather in Schiller’s hat either.

  • Carl Vehse

    According to a January 6, 20111, release, Review Of Juan Williams’ Firing Done; NPR News Exec Resigns, Senior Vice President for News Ellen Weiss, who fired Williams, has resigned.

    Also, because of her role in the firing (and possibly because of her claim that Williams “needed psychiatric help,”) NPR CEO Vivian Schiller will not receive a bonus this year. NPR’s winning a place on the PR Newswire’s Top 2010 PR Blunders list wasn’t a feather in Schiller’s hat either.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X