I'm glad NPR fired Juan Williams

So let me see if I got this right. NPR, funded in part by federal tax dollars, just fired someone based upon their speech. Would that run afoul of the precedent set with regards to 1st Amendment violations that was established in the Lemon v Kurtzman ruling regarding "excessive entanglement" of the government if we substitute press for religion?

As an aside, and I have been waiting for an opportunity to include this in a post, Thomas Jefferson made what I believe to be one of the wisest statements regarding the press in a letter to Elbridge Gerry shortly after he was inaugurated in 1801 as the nation's 3rd President.

A coalition of sentiments is not for the interest of the printers. They, like the clergy, live by the zeal they can kindle, and the schisms they can create. It is contest of opinion in politics as well as religion that makes us take great interest in them, and bestow our money liberally on those who furnish ailment to our appetite.

So the printers can never leave us in a state of perfect rest and union of opinion. They would be no longer useful, and would have to go to the plough.

When one considers the source of funds for NPR, we should remember that it is those that receive an ailment to their appetite that bestow their money liberally to the organization. What then are we to surmise given the source of NPR's money? Didn't Mr. Soros recently bestow a rather large amount ($1.8 Million) of money to the investigative reporting branch of NPR? Who, exactly, do we expect that money to be spent investigating? Hasn't he also been quite supportive of the folks over at Huffpo?

All of a sudden, the mist surrounding the firing of Juan Williams begins to clear...........

I never did have a problem with people from the Middle East or any other countries for that matter. On Sept 11-01 all that changed, and taking more notice of what happened prior to and after that with the attacks around the world on American and other countries citizens in the quest by Muslim extremest to terrorize and kill it now has had an effect on many people. I now have the same type of feelings toward people from the Middle East in their garb or not that I did as a GI in Vietnam in 1969 whenever I encountered or interacted with the civilian population there. I was wary, you never knew if they were a friend or foe. The Muslims brought this on and they will now have to clean up their house before this will ever go away. Juan Williams was right on, on this one. Glad FOX NEWS picked him up as I always enjoyed his perspective even though many times I did not agree with him. NPR is a joke and they proved it here. Juan wasted his time at NPR, he will have 10 times the audience where he is at now.

Juan Williams firing shows how inclusive and open minded progressives really are.

The only thing I believe I have ever agreed with what Juan has said...was his comments about seeing Muslims on a plane.

This may prove to be the end of NPR (National Propoganda Radio) and would be deserving on many levels. Not enough radio stations already? Public funding of a Constitutionally intolerant source? I can only hope this was its death knell.

I love this thread because it has the traditional posistions upside down. LJ and the liberals arguing for Right-To-Fire rules and the Right arguing for workers rights.

But in the end, Juan Williams will land softly after his firing and NPR loses a little respect by forcing out a moderate liberal for a silly reason.

It was interesting to find out George Soros has given 1.8 billion dollars to NPR, I never hear his name at the top of the hour. Guess I don't have to renew my membership this year.

Something the Dog Said wrote: Interesting that those who are so outraged about Juan Williams was fired for disparaging Muslims were celebrating when Helen Thomas was fired for making a comment about Jews. So it must be ok to diss Muslims, but don't say a harsh word about Jews.

I am not outraged about Juan being fired, it was just done badly. Why not let his contract run out instead or even reduce his air time?

And I can celebrate Helen Thomas losing her job even if I don't agree with the reason in that case either. People should be allowed to be politically incorrect w/o worrying about losing their job.

HEARTLESS wrote: This may prove to be the end of NPR (National Propoganda Radio) and would be deserving on many levels. Not enough radio stations already? Public funding of a Constitutionally intolerant source? I can only hope this was its death knell.

Total wishful thinking here. NPR will survive this easily, liberals will still line up to pay to support "public radio". It is like a religion for them. The local station KCFR has expanded steadily throughout the state taking over local stations and they have expanded their programming.

Uh, NPR's funding from the government amounts to somewhere between 1-2%. They apply for a grant, and it's generally given. The rest is from corporate sponsorships and private donations... A bunch of Jesse Helms-type wackos pulling the plug on it won't make much of a dent.

Thanks for reminding me that I need to make my annual donation during the next pledge-drive...

PrintSmith wrote: So let me see if I got this right. NPR, funded in part by federal tax dollars, just fired someone based upon their speech. Would that run afoul of the precedent set with regards to 1st Amendment violations that was established in the Lemon v Kurtzman ruling regarding "excessive entanglement" of the government if we substitute press for religion?

As an aside, and I have been waiting for an opportunity to include this in a post, Thomas Jefferson made what I believe to be one of the wisest statements regarding the press in a letter to Elbridge Gerry shortly after he was inaugurated in 1801 as the nation's 3rd President.

A coalition of sentiments is not for the interest of the printers. They, like the clergy, live by the zeal they can kindle, and the schisms they can create. It is contest of opinion in politics as well as religion that makes us take great interest in them, and bestow our money liberally on those who furnish ailment to our appetite.

So the printers can never leave us in a state of perfect rest and union of opinion. They would be no longer useful, and would have to go to the plough.

When one considers the source of funds for NPR, we should remember that it is those that receive an ailment to their appetite that bestow their money liberally to the organization. What then are we to surmise given the source of NPR's money? Didn't Mr. Soros recently bestow a rather large amount ($1.8 Million) of money to the investigative reporting branch of NPR? Who, exactly, do we expect that money to be spent investigating? Hasn't he also been quite supportive of the folks over at Huffpo?

All of a sudden, the mist surrounding the firing of Juan Williams begins to clear...........

"If there be nothing new, but that which is
Hath been before, how are our brains beguiled..."
Shakespeare

I wondered when someone would mention the Soros connection. His money talks - and shuts down free speech.

NPR's Firing of Juan Williams Was Poorly Handled

It can’t be overlooked that this episode is occurring in a toxic political environment where people are quick to take sides and look for hidden motives. I fear some will look for racial motivations in NPR's decision to fire Williams, who is African-American and one of the few black male NPR voices.

It's not about race. It's also not about free speech, as some have charged. Nor is it about an alleged attempt by NPR to stifle conservative views. NPR offers a broad range of viewpoints on its radio shows and web site.

Instead, this latest incident with Williams centers around a collision of values: NPR's values emphasizing fact-based, objective journalism versus the tendency in some parts of the news media, notably Fox News, to promote only one side of the ideological spectrum.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... 85&ps=cprs