Juan Williams Reacts To Ellen Weiss Resignation

Allahpundit closed out his commentary on this story as follows:

The money line from Williams’s reaction is calling Weiss “the keeper of the flame of liberal orthodoxy [at] NPR,” so I’m guessing maybe one problem with keeping her on was that a “broad range of viewpoints” isn’t exactly at the top of her to-do list. Exit question: On a scale of 1 to 100, what are the odds that NPR is serious this time about ideological diversity? I want to say 1, but given the defunding pressure they’re under for being a liberal house organ, I’m going to bump it all the way up to 2.

I think there are a few other Williams statements of value.


What I crossed was her politically correct red line in the sand. She didn’t need to hear anything else, review anything else. There was nothing I could say that would make her change her mind.

They’ve got a culture there that is not open to real news, that is not open to all points of view, that is not open to the real world around us and to the many different dynamics and perspectives and life stories that animate the news in America.

She was pushing out anybody that had a different perspective about the news and the world.

It’s become highly ingrown or even incestuous.

If they want to be Pravda, if they want to issue propaganda like that, fine.

You’ve got to listen to Juan Williams’ entire interview. No honest individual could say Juan is not a liberal. He most definitely is, but he’s an honest liberal who is more than willing to debate honestly and allow that there are other perspectives, unlike the “ingrown or even incestuous” beast that is NPR.

Exit question: On a scale of 1 to 100, what are the odds that NPR is serious this time about ideological diversity? I want to say 1, but given the defunding pressure they’re under for being a liberal house organ, I’m going to bump it all the way up to 2.

I’m going to have to agree with Allahpundit there. NPR will never be serious about adding ideological diversity to its “ingrown, incestuous” far-left world-view. And Congress needs to defund NPR, PBS, CPB last year at the latest.

88 Comments

  1. Mr Hitchcock wrote:

    And Congress needs to defund NPR, PBS, CPB last year at the latest.

    Yes, but the reason isn’t NPR’s ideological perspective. There are so many sources of information and entertainment out there that there is simply no need to have government-sponsored information and entertainment.

    NPR and PBS really aren’t bad, and they have a lot of listeners and viewers. What really needs to be done is for the government to sell its interest in the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to a private company. The things which PBS/NPR do which draw an audience will remain successful commercially, and if there are things which simply don’t draw enough of an audience to be successful commercially, then they ought to be cancelled, because nobody is watching them in the first place.

  2. NPR and PBS really aren’t bad

    I can’t speak to PBS, but NPR is not only bad, it is rotten. It is a Stalin-esque “News” organization, where anyone who doesn’t toe the Party line becomes an unperson. Shut them down or shut them off, either way, it can’t come too soon!

  3. Eric stated:

    I can’t speak to PBS, but NPR is not only bad, it is rotten. It is a Stalin-esque “News” organization, where anyone who doesn’t toe the Party line becomes an unperson. Shut them down or shut them off, either way, it can’t come too soon!

    Either you don’t listen to NPR, Eric, or you’ve just chosen to make a hyperbolic statement that isn’t even close to reality, in my view.

    Juan Williams was one of my favorite political analysts. I thought at the time that NPR made a terrible mistake in firing him for no justifiable reason. His participation on FoxNews was not a justifiable reason! Fortunately, NPR has studied the situation and taken appropriate action, better than I can say for FoxNews and all their transgressions.

    FoxNews is the organization that you should be criticizing, Eric!

  4. Perry wrote:

    FoxNews is the organization that you should be criticizing, Eric!

    At least Fox News is entirely private: the government isn’t taking your tax dollars to subsidize it. If people like Fox News, it will survive and prosper; if they don’t, it will fade and fold.

  5. Yeah, Eric, if you worked at NPR Perry would fire you for expressing unapproved opinions. So, just you listen to Perry, he knows what you “should” be allowed to do and say. Heck, he might even show you his badge.

  6. ropelight moans:

    Yeah, Eric, if you worked at NPR Perry would fire you for expressing unapproved opinions. So, just you listen to Perry, he knows what you “should” be allowed to do and say. Heck, he might even show you his badge.

    Yeah right, ropelight. NPR studied the event, even hired an outside, independent group to do so, understood that they were wrong, and a thirty year veteran, the principle person, resigned over the matter. Moreover, they have taken steps to generate operations policy to prevent a repeat. This is in stark contrast to your FoxNews, who are NEVER wrong, just like you and your fellow travelers. (I was going to say ‘arrogant’ fellow travelers, but stifled myself.)

  7. NPR studied the event, even hired an outside, independent group to do so, understood that they were wrong, and a thirty year veteran, the principle person, resigned over the matter. Moreover, they have taken steps to generate operations policy to prevent a repeat.

    Of course, a new GOP-dominated House which controls the purse strings had nothing to do with any of that, eh? :-D NPR sure wasted no time at all!

  8. Perry, NPR was stung by the adverse publicity generated when they fired Juan Williams and responded by banishing a scapegoat while leaving intact the uncompromising leftist culture that Williams described as, “…not open to real news, that is not open to all points of view, that is not open to the real world around us and to the many different dynamics and perspectives and life stories that animate the news in America.”

    NPR has demonstrated a cynical band-aid approach to a systemic disease which of allowed to remain unchecked will eventually expose the entire operation to the opprobrium of the American people.

    Taxpayer support for NPR’s hard-line partisan agenda can’t be justified.

  9. ropelight, do you listen to NPR frequently? Do you listen at all? Which shows have you heard? I doubt it, because all you typically mouth is right wing propaganda without citations. I am pretty sure I could identify a few of your sources, because I listen to and watch some of them too, just to keep track of their talking points, and their lies.

    Anyway, if you do not listen, until you do you have not informed yourself sufficiently for intelligent comment on the quality and politics of NPR’s productions.

  10. NPR will never be serious about adding ideological diversity to its “ingrown, incestuous” far-left world-view. And Congress needs to defund NPR, PBS, CPB last year at the latest. >danapico

    ++++++++++++++++++

    Well, public radio gets [per NPR] only 5.8% of its funding from government sources — so I’d agree, set them free, if only to reduce the blather of threads like this one. It’s still the only source of non-biased news on the airwaves; at least that’s a stated goal, unlike where Williams is working now. He’ll be happier at Fox, and NPR will be happier minus his personal opinions and fears being presented in the middle of a news story.

    Juan Williams should never have been hired there in the first place, no more appropriate than it would have been to hire O’Reilly or Hannity. There’s no question that he did the action that got him fired, and not for the first time, either.

  11. “You’ve got to listen to Juan Williams’ entire interview. No honest individual could say Juan is not a liberal. He most definitely is, but he’s an honest liberal who is more than willing to debate honestly and allow that there are other perspectives, unlike the “ingrown or even incestuous” beast that is NPR.”

    Juan is certainly a naive liberal by most appearances when it comes to anticipating the reactions of the commissars of the left.

    Though in listening to his interview yesterday, he did repeatedly advert to a culture of intolerant radically born left-wing cronyism as being ascendant in NPR from its earliest days. Whether this became clearer to him only in retrospect, or whether he thought he would never become its victim because his credentials were solid enough, I do not know.

    It’s not the first time a black man has been sneeringly sacrificed on the agenda altar of some left-wing-white-female interest group. Just one of the more recent. Too bad for him that his last name wasn’t Kennedy. That would have given him a pass no matter what he said or did.

  12. Perry, ask Juan Williams if he’s familiar with NPR’s so-called “news” programming, he knows more about than I do, and I’m sure he meets your standard for personal experience. And, besides, it was his views I quoted.

    You Leftists sure scurry around and make noise when the lights come on and expose the corruption and narrow-minded censorship at the core of your phony public service organizations.

  13. You fools, NPR and PBS has long since turned lame and kissing Republican ass, because Republickcons are all about money. They don’t come close to telling facts we need to know, maybe facts here and there, but you all are just little puppets on a string.

    And, Dana, apparently my news from the Truth Movement thread is not allowing me to post this video clip of the interconnectedness of defense people, and the Trade Centers, and who worked for who for how long, and mostly HOW could it possibly have been done. I left an article that has the findings this video does, but with the source references, of which there are many, because the man is a scientist, and does intense study, sourcing of findings. I bet most of you have been wondering how this could play out…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_j3Kj0Tlec

  14. You fools, NPR and PBS has long since turned lame and kissing Republican ass, because Republickcons are all about money. They don’t come close to telling facts we need to know, maybe facts here and there, but you all are just little puppets on a string.

    Did you catch that, Perry? NPR and PBS are bought and paid for propagandists for the Republican Party, doncha know. So you need to quit paying attention to them. They’re right-wing fringe propaganda outfits. Their fringiness is so bad, they look like Michael J Fox’s outfit when he was getting ready to go back to 1885! Now, that’s fringy!

    So, quit listening to NPR and PBS! The fully sane and rational blu has ejumakated you! ////

  15. Blu, stop posting Truther nonsense. Or restrict such postings to wherever all the Loose Change fans hang out. Or write it on a sandwich board and wear it around town. Nobody else cares and nobody else is ever going to care.

  16. NPR is not so control by the big money (aka GOP) as is PBS, in fact some have called it the Petroleum Broadcast Station. You all that feed off of the MSM, have Robotican brains. Very undernourished. Arrogance makes up for your ignorance, which impedes your capacity for objectivity even more. Tragic. You believe crap, and ignore those things that are verifiable, they scare you too much to look. You all VEHEMENTLY screech when I post material that makes you have to rethink what daddy government told you. Daddy government is a mafia like entity, you chumps. Start looking past the end of your ever growing Pinocchio type nose.

    And nonsense is what the government has fed you, cbmc. Anyone with a scintilla of objectivity and curiosity can see that after looking at both sides of the discussion, but no, you all run and hide like children having gotten caught cheating on a test. Well, you are cheating. You won’t look honestly at both sides. You are afraid to.

  17. Dana Pico says:
    7 January 2011 at 17:37

    BB: you quoted John Hitchcock, not me.

    ++++++++++++++

    Woops, sorry about that. Apologies to both of you.

  18. No one sane will ever care, Blu. Ever. I’m glad you enjoy crazy people with credentials. They are also insane.

  19. ropelight moans on:

    Perry, ask Juan Williams if he’s familiar with NPR’s so-called “news” programming, he knows more about than I do, and I’m sure he meets your standard for personal experience. And, besides, it was his views I quoted.

    You Leftists sure scurry around and make noise when the lights come on and expose the corruption and narrow-minded censorship at the core of your phony public service organizations.

    How impressive is that statement? Is it based on any demonstrated facts that ropelight cites? Typical!

    Ropelight, I already stated that NPR mishandled the Juan Williams situation. And, I pointed out that they corrected their problem by using an outside independent study, then acted on their analysis. When has your FoxNews behaved as maturely to all of their exposed lies and guffaws?

    More than that, ropelight, I asked you a few important questions to help you along with your credibility:

    “ropelight, do you listen to NPR frequently? Do you listen at all? Which shows have you heard?”

    Since you refused to answer, I assume your answers to be: No; No; None.

    Therefore, you have presented neither citations nor first hand knowledge to back up your rant. This is neither impressive nor convincing!

  20. Hitchcock jests:

    So, quit listening to NPR and PBS! The fully sane and rational blu has ejumakated you!

    Well John, I don’t agree with blubonnet on this issue, nor to I agree with you righties who go off half cocked with no facts, only stupid ideology.

    Of course NPR and PBS have corporate sponsors, which they display openly. And good for those supporting corporations, because they are helping to produce some of the highest quality radio and TV available to Americans, in my opinion!

  21. From the Ministry of Truth:

    Juan Williams should never have been hired there in the first place, no more appropriate than it would have been to hire O’Reilly or Hannity. There’s no question that he did the action that got him fired, and not for the first time, either.

  22. because they are helping to produce some of the highest quality radio and TV available to Americans, in my opinion!

    It’s TV and radio for the Living Dead.

  23. Eric commands:

    “List some [FoxNews lies] or shut up.”

    Well lookee here, Eric wants a citation! Wow!!!

    But that’s OK Eric, I’ll step past your hypocrisy and give you a citation. I appreciate the extremely easy request you’ve made for starters.

    For starters, check this one out.

    In the future, please feel free to call me out for citations, when needed.

  24. Eric can’t resist:

    It’s TV and radio for the Living Dead.

    Yeah, the nasty streak of righties is alive and well this morning!

  25. I don’t know Perry. I recall some good programs on PBS going way back. They did “the Beauty and the Beast” whith George C. Scott, I believe they did “George Washington” with Barry Bostwick too. “The Civil War” series, “I Claudius”, “Horatio Hornblower” and “Sherlock Holmes” also come to mind. All very good, IN MY OPINION! Of course we also have HBO who brought us “Band of Brothers”, “The Pacific”, “The Sopranos”, and a lot of other movies and series of value.

    Now as far as NPR is concerned, I’m with Eric. It’s like listening to Ben Stein” character in Ferris Beuler, BOOOR-RING! My friend Roy listens to NPR all the time but he listens for the classical music (That’s why I ve a 6 CD player).

    My (our) main point is not that PBS or NPR have no value or quality. It’s that no tax money should be put into programming in this modern world of thousands of TV and radio channels and the internet. We just don’t need nor can afford that any more. Believe me, if they loose that 5.8% of government funds they will adjust their business model and if there is demand for their product, it will continue.

  26. I don’t listen to NPR anymore, not because I have some aversion to it, but because I’m no longer doing a lot of driving during their Morning Edition and All Things Considered times. From when I did listen, they did a better job of covering a story in depth than other radio stations, because that was simply what they did. But for in-depth coverage, I’d rather read than listen; when you are reading, if something doesn’t register the first time, you can go back and read it again.

    Hoagie has it right:

    My (our) main point is not that PBS or NPR have no value or quality. It’s that no tax money should be put into programming in this modern world of thousands of TV and radio channels and the internet. We just don’t need nor can afford that any more. Believe me, if they loose that 5.8% of government funds they will adjust their business model and if there is demand for their product, it will continue.

    Whether you believe NPR to be good or bad isn’t the issue. The issue ought to be: is it an absolute necessity that the government must fund, or is it something that can survive with 100% private funding?

    I believe that NPR/PBS would survive on their own, as private entities. But even if they did not, we would still survive as a society without them.

  27. Perry, answer Juan Williams’ criticisms of NPR if you can. It was him who said,

    “They’ve got a culture there that is not open to real news, that is not open to all points of view, that is not open to the real world around us and to the many different dynamics and perspectives and life stories that animate the news in America.”

    Then ask yourself why anyone but a fellow Leftist true-believer would subject themselves to the sophomoric prattle NPR pushes at taxpayer expense.

    NPR’s totalitarian rejection of Juan Williams’ obviously true statement proves the existing culture at NPR is institutionally incapable of honest and forthright journalism.

  28. Perry wrote:

    Eric can’t resist:

    It’s TV and radio for the Living Dead.

    Yeah, the nasty streak of righties is alive and well this morning!

    Well, the PBS station around here (WVIA) carries The Lawrence Welk Show; maybe it really is TV for the living dead! :)

    Yeah, there’s one program which might not survive a total privatization of PBS.

  29. Sorry, Perry, you’ll have to do better than citing the Huffington Post. I guess I should have clarified my request and asked for an objective and unbiased source, but I doubt you can find any.

  30. Rope wrote:

    Then ask yourself why anyone but a fellow Leftist true-believer would subject themselves to the sophomoric prattle NPR pushes at taxpayer expense.

    NPR’s totalitarian rejection of Juan Williams’ obviously true statement proves the existing culture at NPR is institutionally incapable of honest and forthright journalism.

    You just don’t understand, rope! Conservatives can recognize that Fox News has a conservative bias, and that most of the other media have a liberal one. But for our friends on the left, since they pretty much already accept the orientation of NPR and CNN and NBC, etc, as Teh Truth, they don’t see them as biased at all, but wholly objective.

  31. It’s funny, but Blu’s normal incoherant insanity notwithstanding, I was watching a program last week on PBS (think it was Nova) and in the credits it was noted the show had been sponsered by grants from ExxonMobile and one of the Koch brothers. Maybe she has a point, PBS is taken over by the Repubs?

  32. You just don’t understand, rope! Conservatives can recognize that Fox News has a conservative bias, and that most of the other media have a liberal one. But for our friends on the left, since they pretty much already accept the orientation of NPR and CNN and NBC, etc, as Teh Truth, they don’t see them as biased at all, but wholly objective.

    That is perfectly stated, Dana. I know of virtually NO conservative who doesn’t admit to Fox’s rightist bias, yet “progressives” get apoplectic when one suggests the rest of the MSM leans left. Hell, some even will argue that the MSM is right-leaning! That takes either some real balls, or reveals a serious mental illness … ;-)

  33. Sorry, Perry, you’ll have to do better than citing the Huffington Post. I guess I should have clarified my request and asked for an objective and unbiased source, but I doubt you can find any.

    Hey Perry — you mean this Huffington Post? LOL!

  34. It’s prob’ly a corporatist plot that on my local cable service, I can get CNN and Fox News on the high-definition channels, but MSNBC is shown only on the standard channels.

  35. Dana, count yourself lucky. I get MSNBC in HD and can’t watch it. When the spittle starts flying my involuntary response is to duck. It’s so annoying I have to change channels.

  36. Hube, I don’t agree that FOX NEWS is biased toward conservatives. It only seems that way because virtually every other news outlet is so excessively Leftist. When FOX makes a concerted effort to cover both sides, it’s such a change from the usual unchallenged leftist claptrap that it stands out in high relief.

    Consider this: Now, comprehensive news coverage is considered biased toward a conservative point of view. Tune to FOX if you want to hear what the other side has to say. Is it any wonder that FOX NEWS is growing by leaps and bounds while all other TV news organizations are hemorrhaging viewers?

  37. Eric plays “attack the messenger”:

    Sorry, Perry, you’ll have to do better than citing the Huffington Post. I guess I should have clarified my request and asked for an objective and unbiased source, but I doubt you can find any.

    You will note that HuffPo supplies the evidence for each claim, Eric. How can you possibly refute that. I understand that you just don’t want to believe it.

    Here’s another long, long list with evidence for each lie for you to brush off again because you don’t like to admit it.

  38. Hube says:

    Hey Perry — you mean this Huffington Post? LOL!

    Hube, I am not about to defend HuffPo generally. I view it essentially as a blog with a plethora of editorial opinions, each expressed over a byline. Regarding the “news” portion, I find it to be very selective, in favor of the liberal side, no doubt.

    However, I think you would agree that FoxNews, focusing on the news side of it, not the opinion side, has been guilty of making a large number of disinformation statements for ideological purposes. I think it is a misnomer for them to call themselves “Fair and Balanced”, when they clearly are not. On the other hand, MSNBC, which is mostly opinion, makes no such statement, knowing full well that they are not fair and balanced. Fox ought to cut out that claim, because it is obviously a lie, in my view.

    I think it is fair to say that PBS’s The News Hour, is fair and balanced. I say the same about the Nightly Business Report on PBS. On network news, I think Brian Williams does a pretty good job.

  39. ropelight reveals something:

    Hube, I don’t agree that FOX NEWS is biased toward conservatives.

    That’s right, ropelight, this statement says/reveals more about you than it does about making an honest assessment.

  40. Fox News’ news section is the most balanced news available. They may tilt to the right somewhat, but they’re far more balanced than anything else on TV. And PMSNBC is not a news outlet; it’s a far-left propaganda organization.

  41. ropelight says:
    8 January 2011 at 10:39 (Edit)

    Perry, answer Juan Williams’ criticisms of NPR if you can. It was him who said,

    “They’ve got a culture there that is not open to real news, that is not open to all points of view, that is not open to the real world around us and to the many different dynamics and perspectives and life stories that animate the news in America.”

    This has been placed in front of Perry multiple times. And, as is his way, he has totally ignored it. Despite Perry’s claim to have respect for Juan.

  42. I didn’t say that NPR and PBS were worthless, I tried to say that neither is a beacon of light, or Liberal, per se, admittedly they do some good exposes. Nothing in the realm of what it should be though.

    The political discussion groups are seldom hitting on much real news. The real news, I’ll leave to those like Assange, while you pansy asses play monkeys and cover your eyes. Deaf, dumb and blind suits you, and frankly that is what I’d expect from you. Spineless wusses. Reality, verifiable reality, you want no part of, because it might earn you the title “kook”. I believe nothing but that which is verifiable. You all on the other hand cower. Pathetic.

  43. Who has the balls around here to really start understanding how far propaganda has operated in our media and our government, both working together? Or are you going to cower? This is called Psywar. It’s a good thing to stimulate those otherwise stagnating brain cells on this cold winter day. Become part of the ever growing population that is awake. No, don’t panic, it’s not about what you assume.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXg70qJQ6O0

  44. Hitchcock. you are the poster boy for the term FASCISM. It doesn’t surprise me that you would suggest killing a journalist for telling the American population what is being done in their name. Your asininity never fails to show itself. The reality of all these things being present bypasses your awareness, because FOX and the MSM in general are players for the Pentagon too, in the “War on Terror”. In other words, the phrase, “In war the first casualty is the truth” fails to register in your little brain.

    The 14 Defining
    Characteristics Of Fascism

    Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
    1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
    2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
    3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

    4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
    5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
    6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
    7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
    8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed
    to the government’s policies or actions.
    9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
    10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
    11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
    12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
    13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
    14. Fraudulent Elections – Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

  45. Oh, I never suggested killing a journalist. I suggested killing Julian Assange, through legal means, and added snark value.

    But thanks for playing, blu, better luck next week on wheel of fortune.

  46. Hitchcock whines again:

    This [about Juan Williams' firing by NPR] has been placed in front of Perry multiple times. And, as is his way, he has totally ignored it. Despite Perry’s claim to have respect for Juan.

    John, do pay attention before you go shooting off your mouth. I answered your question way back here!

  47. Perry yet again proves he cannot be bothered to understand the actual statement he quotes and alters, while using his normal ad hominem attack and his passive agressive condescension.

    This [about Juan Williams' firing by NPR] has been placed in front of Perry multiple times. And, as is his way, he has totally ignored it. Despite Perry’s claim to have respect for Juan.

    No, Perry, what I stated was not “about Juan Williams’ firing by NPR”. Perry, “do pay attention before you go shooting off your mouth.”

    Hitchcock whines again

    ad hominem

  48. Perry, did you see the documentary I posted? Please watch it if you can. We (the USA) really have a program in place keeping fools like Hitchcock stupid and useful to the corporate war profiteering scum on this earth who have been having gatekeepers filtering out what is and is “not” acceptable by their standards what we can learn. Fortunately many journalist document, and make documentaries confirming what the common MSM won’t touch.

  49. You think you get the whole story, Hitchcock? Wow, you are a blithering fool!

    Big Oil’s Foundation/PBS Links

    by bob feldman
    9 December 2002

    Some of the profits that San Francisco-based Chevron Texaco has made during the last ten years has gone to PBS’s Washington, D.C. outlet, WETA-TV. In 1992, for instance, a foundation grant of over $2.4 million was given to WETA-TV by Chevron to fund PBS¹s National Geographic Specials. That same year Chevron¹s foundation also gave money to the following other ³non-profit² organizations:

    *
    Stanford University was given 3 grants, totaling $455,000, by Chevron
    *
    University of California-Berkeley was given 2 grants, totaling $217,000 by Chevron
    *
    The American Enterprise Institute For Public Policy Research in Washington, D.C. was given a $70,000 grant by Chevron
    *
    The Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. was given a $60,000 grant by Chevron
    *
    The National Council of La Raza in Washington, D.C. was given a $65,000 grant by Chevron
    *
    The NAACP in New York City was given a $55,000 grant by Chevron

    Among the ³non-profit² organizations who received foundation grants from Chevron two years later, in 1994, were the following:

    *
    San Francisco¹s KQED/Channel 2, which was given a $152,000 grant by Chevron¹s foundation
    *
    The San Francisco Opera Association, which was given an $86,000 grant by Chevron¹s foundation
    *
    The African American Institute in New York City, which was given a $90,000 grant by Chevron¹s foundation
    *
    The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, which was given another $70,000 grant by Chevron¹s foundation
    *
    Stanford University, which given 4 grants, totalling $495,000, by Chevron¹ s foundation
    *
    University of California at Berkeley, which was given a $342,000 grant by Chevron¹s foundation
    *
    The Hoover Institute On War, Peace and Revolution in Stanford, California, which was given a $120,000 grant by Chevron¹s foundation
    *
    The Center for Strategic and International Studies in D.C., which was given another $100,000 in tax-exempt money by Chevron¹s foundation

  50. Oh, I never suggested killing a journalist. I suggested killing Julian Assange,

    Exodus 20:13

  51. Just having him killed was your preference, right, Hitchcocksucker. You are such a sucker for the corporate lines at the expense of humanity.

    cbmc, you are such a fool as well, you think you are in the majority? Those that still eat the government version of that day, the bovine matter? Fortunately you are int he minority, which is continuing to become smaller. But feel free to continue blithering.

    These are the results of more recent polls, and the numbers have continued to grow since. For example the number of architects and engineers is now at 1400+. There would be more, but the verifying process of their credentials is tedious. Stop playing the ostrich.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlPweD6R3Cc

  52. Blu, as per the rules, cease and desist from your 911 Truther commenting on this thread. Had you not started the Truther comments, in violation of the rules, cbmc would not have engaged you on that topic in this non/truther thread.

  53. there is a difference between killing and murdering. and a difference in life physical and life eternal.

    did you know that pho?

    learn some greek and hebrew. then quote scripture dumbass.

  54. in fact, i forgot.

    your scripture quoting days are void. the bible is meaningless to you and therefor has no bearing on your arguments to us.

    try again.

  55. You didn’t take note of my message to Dana, did you. I’m not bitching. I am just improvising. Also, awareness would do you some good.

  56. Children Of Tomorrow
    I apologize to you
    On behalf of those in my time
    …For the things we didn’t do
    We didn’t stop the tyrants
    So your fate could be prevented
    We watched them steal our freedom
    By our silence we consented
    We didn’t choose to circumvent
    The doom you’ve not escaped
    While the Bill of Rights was murdered
    And the Constitution raped
    Some of us were lazy
    Others too afraid
    To think about our children
    The ones we have betrayed
    I guess we were too busy
    To be concerned or care
    To try to ease the burden
    Of the chains we made you wear
    We could have been good shepherds
    When the wolf got in the fold
    But we watched the flame of freedom die instead
    And left you cold

    I’m sorry we were timid
    My selfish generation
    We left you but a remnant
    Of a free and prosperous nation
    I’m sorry for our actions
    Like cowards we behaved
    We could have left you freedom
    Instead you are enslaved
    Children of tomorrow
    Descendants of our land
    I’m sorry we allowed this
    The fate you now with stand

  57. NZT, I never suggested murdering Julian Assange

    Riiiiight, PB – because assassinating an Australian citizen overseas isn’t murder, huh? If Castro or Chavez ordered an American killed, that would be totally legal too, and in no way murder, right?

    So what we have is the convenient loophole wingnuts love. If they favour murdering someone, they simply say “Oh, it’s killing and not murder”. They don’t have to give a justification, don’t have to consider ethics, don’t have to try squaring this away with Christian teachings. they can have any amount of blood on their hands, but as long as they warble “killing, not murder” – regardless of teh facts – they feel justified.

    Do you really think God is so easily fooled by your sophistry?

  58. NZT, I never called for Julian Assange’s assassination. Execution, yes. Assassination, no.

    And how exactly do you believe an “execution” by America of an Australian residing in Europe is anything other than an assassination, you blithering fool?

    But do please tell us where the Bible supports murdering people for teh grave sin of telling the truth about a government…

  59. Silly boy. The Bible does indeed call for executing people for all manner of offenses, but you would know that if you actually had any interest in what the Bible says for you.

    And, as is your way, you make all manner of false premises (also known as filthy lies) regarding my statements in order to weakly attempt to make me defend a position I never held. Your logic skills are null.

  60. Have you read the principles of journalism? Assange was doing his job. Period. Doing it well.

    As democracies fall, the plight of messengers/journalists the challenges physically, emotionally and ethically increase enormously. Shooting the messenger. It always happens in history, when good journalism occurs. When the state is covering their ass, more than anything else. Then, the power they have, gets sent down to channels that get the money from the government, I’m not talking about PBS per se. The GOP would love to dump funding for the most Left (not near Left enough) and keep the mostly unknown cashflow for the common MSM. You all probably don’t know about those things, because you prefer not to know things that displease you.

    Did you know that the middle-eastern war now has more dead journalists than ever before in a war? Information war is part of the democratic demise.

    You should consider the highly respected (among journalists) source known as PROJECT CENSORED, which works with universities, and expose the many many different verifiable stories, that the common MSM won’t dare touch, because they (MSM)are owned by someone. Pull your head from the commonness of MSM and its watered down, washed pretty BS. Even PBS or NPR won’t get their hands dirty, digging up real dirt, so the sterilized bovine matter you get, grows your ignorance further into usefulness for the corporate big boys, who don’t give a damn about you.

  61. “Silly boy” Hitchcock equivocates again:

    Silly boy. The Bible does indeed call for executing people for all manner of offenses, but you would know that if you actually had any interest in what the Bible says for you.

    And, as is your way, you make all manner of false premises (also known as filthy lies) regarding my statements in order to weakly attempt to make me defend a position I never held. Your logic skills are null.

    It is quite obvious, John, that you believe in only portions of the Bible that support your outrageously extreme ideology. Moreover, when PiaToR carefully selects a portion which advises against your proscription, you dismiss it out-of-hand. You don’t think we notice this?

    Moreover, I agree with Blubonnet. Just what has Assange done wrong? And you want to assassinate/execute the man! How Biblical of you! Our Justice Department hasn’t even figured that out yet what he’s done illegally. The real culprit is/are the person/persons who leaked the classified information, since he/they broke their oath/the law to not do so. And no, he/they should not be assassinated/executed either, not even tortured as we have been doing for the past six months. Bring him/them to trial, but humane treatment, in the meantime, is to be expected.

    Yes, it is very disturbing to have parts of our foreign policy undermined by the leaks. On the other hand, the truth that emerges could have a favorable impact, having revealed some of the real stuff that goes on behind closed doors, not to mention the vanity and silliness that passes for diplomacy. Suddenly diplomats appear as the human beings that they are. Voila!!!

  62. Blubonnet posts:

    Children Of Tomorrow
    I apologize to you
    On behalf of those in my time
    ….

    Sure is a lot of truth and wisdom expressed in that, Blubonnet. Thanks for posting it!

  63. Eric plays “attack the messenger”:

    That’s because your “Messengers” are always from the far left. Try posting something objective and unbiased if you want to be taken seriously.

  64. On Hitchcock’s unjustified attacks on NPR and PBS, I asked him to comment on the following:

    Hitchcock claims:

    They’re leftist shills.

    And exactly who are these so-called left wing shills, John? Jim Lehrer? Tom Hudson? Susie Gahrib?

    Here is the NPR web page. From it, please list the left wing shills.

    Here is the NPR News web page. From it, please list the left wing shills.

    Here is the PBS web page. From it, please list the left wing shills.

    Do you watch or listen to any NPR or PBS shows regularly, John? If so, which ones?

    I look forward to your reply.

    John, you are the first to criticize when someone does not respond to you, sometimes even within only a matter of hours. So here is your second chance, after over two months: Respond!

    I also direct this request to Ropelight, who also rarely responds to questions, rather continues on his merry way of attacking those who disagree with him, including on this PBS/NPR issue. So what is your response, Ropelight?

    I suspect you two never listen/watch NPR/PBS; instead, it is all about ideology, as per usual.

  65. Eric responds wrt FoxNews lies:

    That’s because your “Messengers” are always from the far left. Try posting something objective and unbiased if you want to be taken seriously.

    I’ll just repeat my response made to you earlier:

    You will note that HuffPo supplies the evidence for each claim, Eric. How can you possibly refute that. I understand that you just don’t want to believe it.

    I also posted the evidence Media Matters supplied.

    But you choose to disregard the evidence and attack the messenger. That’s hardly a convincing response from you, Eric, in the minds of those who look for facts. Instead, its weak, actually meaningless!

  66. I suspect you two never listen/watch NPR/PBS; instead, it is all about ideology, as per usual.

    I suspect you never listen to talk radio nor watch FOX News; instead, it is all about ideology, as per usual.

  67. Eric suspects:

    I suspect you never listen to talk radio nor watch FOX News; instead, it is all about ideology, as per usual.

    Wrong again, Eric, I listen to FoxNews, Rush, and Michael Savage, all of which are carried by our local right wing radio outlet, plus I watch snippets of FoxNews on a daily basis. Therefore, your suspicion is not correct.

  68. Fine, Perry. In your experience, have you ever heard any of them tell a lie, and, if so, what was it? I trust your first hand experience a lot more than the far left loons at Media Matters.

  69. Eric asks:

    Fine, Perry. In your experience, have you ever heard any of them tell a lie, and, if so, what was it? I trust your first hand experience a lot more than the far left loons at Media Matters.

    I cannot off hand think of any, Eric. This is not to say that it has not happened on PBS and/or NPR. I will say this, however, and that is I recall corrections for errors being given later, although I cannot now recall specifically. Do FoxNews or Rush correct their errors?

  70. Do FoxNews or Rush correct their errors?

    Duh.
    Yes they do.

    In fact, Fox News goes so far as to go out of their way to state up front that another news service is owned by the same company that owns Fox every time they refer to one. PMSNBC et al, not so much.

  71. Silly boy. The Bible does indeed call for executing people for all manner of offenses, but you would know that if you actually had any interest in what the Bible says for you.

    Where does the Bible call for the execution of people for tellign the truth about governments, PB? Come on, Mr “Christian” – chapter and verse.

    You can’t, can you? Twit.

    Oh, and as regards your sophistry about “execution” vs “murder” – in 2006, journalist Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned with polonium in London. It is generally thought that he was killed at the orders of President Putin of Russia, whose government he had embarrassed.

    To most people, this would be a case of murder, plain and simple. To you, killing journalists in other countries is a-ok when ordered by governments, and you’d call it an “execution” rather than an assassination – and you’d claim the Bible supported it.

    Which is why real Christians would consider your pretensions to religion with contempt.

  72. Again, NZT, with your deranged habit of trying to make people defend statements they have never made and do not support. You are logic fallacy personified.

  73. No Mr. Hitchcock. He’s a deranged nut job who either tries to attribute words (and thoughts) to others or takes anything to the point of ad absurdum. He’s got a bad case of not being able to think in a logical line. I just can’t figure why he’s so obsessed with what goes on in America.

  74. Plus he now apparently an expert on the bible. I’ll have to add that to his (not so impressive) resume.

  75. Eric you fool, facts fit into the “far Left”. The common corporate/government controlled media does not. But I wouldn’t expect anything but commonness of mind from you, so, this retort is more for my own venting, not so much for you to actually fathom. You mind cannot, and will not process what doesn’t fit into your common mind/world view.

  76. Oh, I never suggested killing a journalist. I suggested killing Julian Assange</em?

    Where does the Bible call for the execution of journalists for telling the truth about governments, PB? Chapter and verse, please.

    So much for being a "Christian". What a joke you are.

Comments are closed.