:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

I never doubted that for a moment... :lol:

 

So, how would you feel if Fox News received the same federal funding?

I'd be very against it, as Fox isn't a not-for-profit charity. On the contrary, Fox makes the big bucks, in my opinion by preaching to the choir--but that's neither here nor there. The point is that, as a for-profit entity, unlike NPR, they shouldn't.

I agree the bolded is not true.

 

If it is something they agree with, they usually only say muted on the point or at least don't raise a big ruckus about it.

 

Can you restate the above? I have no idea what you're saying.

Can you restate the above? I have no idea what you're saying.

 

Example, did we hear a big ruckus from NOW when someone from the Brown camp called Witman the W word? Not as much if it would have been a Republican calling a Democrat candidate the same thing.

Example, did we hear a big ruckus from NOW when someone from the Brown camp called Witman the W word? Not as much if it would have been a Republican calling a Democrat candidate the same thing.

 

Gotcha. I'm not sure what the W word is but I think I get your point.

 

However, it doesn't answer my question as to why people think liberals would get upset at a perceived prejudice or ignorant statement.

But then, how much gets funneled from the public radio stations to NPR? I think that's what confuses people.

 

It doesn't matter. I'm not aware of any privately owned radio stations that carry any NPR programming. Without public radio stations, there would be no NPR.

It doesn't matter. I'm not aware of any privately owned radio stations that carry any NPR programming. Without public radio stations, there would be no NPR.

 

Sure it does if you're trying to find out how much public support NPR gets. If the stations get a large part of their revenue from the public and NPR gets a large part of it's revenues from these same stations in the form of programing fees, how can it not matter?

It is interesting to see the polar opposites when it comes to responses to single comments. NPR nails Juan for this while Fox lets a reporter joke about offing both Osama and Obama in 2008 without word one being said. Even if some try to rationalize it as a poor attempt at humor the diverse responses to the two are extreme.

 

I'm not saying either are right or either are wrong because they have to answer to the public.

I read today that the head of NPR has apologized for the hastiness of the firing and the fact that they didn't bring Juan in to discuss it face-to-face. However, what I found interesting is that she said there have been "several instances" in recent months where NPR has asked Juan to tone down his public comments on controversial issues. While we can all debate whether that request is valid we all have to admit that if your boss tells you to stop doing something and you keep doing it you're going to get fired.

 

Juan made a mistake although it seems to have turned out well financially for him.

It is interesting to see the polar opposites when it comes to responses to single comments. NPR nails Juan for this while Fox lets a reporter joke about offing both Osama and Obama in 2008 without word one being said. Even if some try to rationalize it as a poor attempt at humor the diverse responses to the two are extreme.

 

I'm not saying either are right or either are wrong because they have to answer to the public.

 

As there wouldn't be a thing said about Juan's comments if NPR didn't make the rash decision to fire him. Blame your liberal media outlet for that one.

As there wouldn't be a thing said about Juan's comments if NPR didn't make the rash decision to fire him. Blame your liberal media outlet for that one.

 

Can you re-phrase your first sentence? Are you saying if NPR hadn't been "rash" that they would not have fired him? The CEO would disagree with you.

 

Are you saying that the only reason they fired him was their politics and not the fact that he has been repeatedly warned about such statements?

 

And who is my "liberal media outlet?"

Can you re-phrase your first sentence? Are you saying if NPR hadn't been "rash" that they would not have fired him? The CEO would disagree with you.

 

Are you saying that the only reason they fired him was their politics and not the fact that he has been repeatedly warned about such statements?

 

And who is my "liberal media outlet?"

 

Bottom line, he was fired over comments that NPR did not agree with. Call it bigotry, call it expressing his nervousness, I don't care.

 

Liberal media outlet? Well, what is the current media outlet we are talking about? I'll let you answer this one by yourself.

I don't listen to NPR much, but on the occasions I have, I have found their reporting to be accurate and discussions of major issues to be pretty down-the-middle.

 

It certainly wasn't Air America. And it isn't Fox News, either.

 

NPR is obviously a little drier than the cable news outlets, but I like serious discussion of relevant issues without both sides spending most of their time trying to hawk their talking points.

Bottom line, he was fired over comments that NPR did not agree with. f.

 

Correct. However, this wasn't his first rodeo so why should we feel sorry for him? He was warned previously . If he didn't like his warning he could have quit. He didn't. He took a chance. He got fired. We all have rules we have to live by, right?

Correct. However, this wasn't his first rodeo so why should we feel sorry for him? He was warned previously . If he didn't like his warning he could have quit. He didn't. He took a chance. He got fired. We all have rules we have to live by, right?

 

I'm not saying I feel sorry for him. Heck, he just got a 2 million dollar deal out of all this. I just don't see how NPR fires someone for expressing some of his nervousness at an airport. What if Juan were to say, " If I found myself at an abortion clinic. I would be afraid that a christian might bomb it." Do you think that he would of been fired?

I'm not saying I feel sorry for him. Heck, he just got a 2 million dollar deal out of all this. I just don't see how NPR fires someone for expressing some of his nervousness at an airport. What if Juan were to say, " If I found myself at an abortion clinic. I would be afraid that a christian might bomb it." Do you think that he would of been fired?

Actually, yes ... I do think he would have been fired for that comment, and there certainly would have been much more of an uproar about it.

 

I don't believe that Juan Williams, who I like and respect, is a bigot. But if he was warned about these types of comments in the past, then I would say that NPR's decision to fire him stands up a little more on principle.

 

I'm not sure I would make that same judgment about the validity of comments from some of those blasting NPR.