Apologize? You can't just apologize unless Williams could just apologize. NPR CEO Vivian Schiller must resign.
Schiller spills 'er guts:
And don't you just love the notion that ordinary human feelings are mental disorders that should be kept hidden? In NPR's delightful vision of the future, no one will dare to speak about how they feel and every inappropriate twinge that breaks through your self-protective numbness will be medicalized and treated. Imagine a country that adopts a psychiatric treatment model for political dissent. It's easy if you try.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
234 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 234 of 234nobody: note that, in general, those here (including the proprietress) who recognize that the termination of his employment was wrong and that the public representations that have been made about him are defamatory failed to see the same in the case of Shirley Sherrod, and vice versa.
Nope. We understood the context of her remarks in question. We didn't fail to see it - most of us here, to our credit, defended *that* part of her little rant.
It was her racist comments after that snippet that we didn't support.
Its all in the Sherrod threads here. Easy for anyone who's actually interested in the truth to discover.
So try again, Mr Sockpuppet. Your feeble attempt at equivalence has failed.
Libtard: Ok fine. Corrected. Williams has a fear of flying with a boss of his. Better?
No Garage.
Try: Williams would have an instance of fear that would be quickly controlled and replaced with the notion that its wrong to paint all muslims with the same brush.
I swear, we could count the lights for you, and you would still insist 2 + 2 = 5.
I only brought the lousy Red Sox because their owner John Henry has become a frequent and valued commenter here.
Don't worry about Juan. Fox will hire him and Fox's ratings will increase because of it. Win-win. Juan should thank his lucky stars that he's not at that loser station anymore.
Yeah I agree. NPR wants to treat him like John Henry treated Ted Williams.
Cut off his head and stick it on a can of tuna fish.
That's John Henry Willimans, Ted's son. Not the John Henry who posts here.
lincolntf said: "It's a proven, ratings-based fact that self-identified liberals listen to right-wing talk."
So true. Since I don't listen to the guy, I've heard the most about him from lefties than righties. By far.
The main thing I like about him is the same thing I like about Palin - they both send the right people into moonbatshit crazy hissy fits.
So this is the latest Poutrage? Just like political dissidents from the Soviet Union? Why not tie the Williams firing to medical experiments by the Nazis. What in the fuck. LOL
Whyever not, garage? I would think that folks who hysterically insist that a society that doesn't outlaw "hate speech" is halfway down a very steep slippery slope to genocide, ought to recognize that malicious imputations of mental illness based on non-approved opinions are surely harbingers of Soviet-style psychiatric abuses right around the corner.
(I like "poutrage" though. I don't get out much so that's a new one to me.)
lincolntf said: "It's a proven, ratings-based fact that self-identified liberals listen to right-wing talk."
No, I didn't.
No offense taken but you must be referring to someone else.
(I like "poutrage" though. I don't get out much so that's a new one to me.)
haha. It's a stretch in my opinion because the spirit of the Constitution is the that it is the government that cannot infringe on the right of free speech, not an employer. I can't walk into my boss's office and say whatever I want without fear of consequence.
Garage: the spirit of the Constitution is the that it is the government that cannot infringe on the right of free speech, not an employer. I can't walk into my boss's office and say whatever I want without fear of consequence.
Your ethics (ha!) are situational.
If an instiution promoting religion got one cent from the federal government, you'd be balthering about "separation of Church and State".
And no, you're not worth an edit
"A pulse of fear when observing someone in foreign dress is like the textbook example of bigotry."
What kind of "textbooks" have you been reading? I think the word you should have used was "xenophobia," but couldn't resist your pathological compulsion to shout "bigot!!!!"
Lincoln,
Terribly sorry anyway for the misattribution. ScottM said it.
Thanks for the understanding.
What galls me is Juan Williams was a victim of this New, ubiquitous PC oppression by the Left that everyone is expected to kow-tow to, or else! Particularly with respect to Muslims.
We can freely say, as we have for almost 70 years, that the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor, without tailoring our thoughts to fit the demanded Leftist template. We are not required to say, "On Dec 6th, 1941 a small group of extremist Japanese militarists, in no way representative of the vast majority of noble and peace-loving Japanese people, attacked us on 9/11."
When we say Nazis put people in gas chambers, we due not have a mandated obligation to preface that with "Of course, the Nazis were in no way representative of the wonderful German people and their great contribution to history and civilization. Nor were ALL Nazis actual genocidal manaics..but a certain small percentage of Nazis.. in no way typical of the German Volk... DID gas lots of people....."
This PC garbage started after 9/11 on reasonable fear that innocent Muslims might suffer backlash, but it somehow was institutionalized by Leftists and "aggrieved Muslim groups" into rote behavior in power spheres they influence - that whenever some Muslims kill people, the person noting that is obligated to "Overbalance that". With near endless praise about how wonderful other Muslims are. Fail to include praise for the magnificent Muslim people, their nations, and religion - just criticize the Islamoid hijackers or terrorists, and the PC crowd immediately wades in with accusations of intolerance and bigotry.
I mean, jeez!!! Last Sept 11th in NYC had PC speaker after speaker come out and not commemorate the day as a tragic attack, but as the day we should, de facto, all mark as Muslim Appreciation Day - lest we get the wrong message and barrative "from the tragedy", and thus discriminate against innocent, wonderful Muslims.
Look. I spent considerable time in Japan. I like the Japanese, truly admire their culture, the quest for perfection and hard work. But I don't gloss over that considerable numbers of Japanese were absolutely beastial in war, or that the Japanese attacked America, Great Britain, China, the Philippines, and all of SE Asia.
And no, Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day is NOT and never will be "Japanese Appreciation Day" where speaker after speaker is supposed to praise all things Japanese to high heaven and only talk obliquely about the "tragedy" lest the noble, peace-loving Japanese are somehow offended.
To the Japanese's credit, they have big shoulders take the criticisms of their past history (without being guilt-riddled doormats like modern Germans) and justly accept praise they deserve, well and gracefully. They do not come across as the seething, insecure, whining or bullying hysterics. That many on the Left and within the Muslim Ummah display over the slightest hint that people have a problem with certain Muslims blowing up unbelievers.
Cedarford: Fail to include praise for the magnificent Muslim people, their nations, and religion - just criticize the Islamoid hijackers or terrorists, and the PC crowd immediately wades in with accusations of intolerance and bigotry.
They do this because "West/America=Bad;Non-West Noble Victim Always Good" is all they know. It's pretty much all they got in the ol' intellectual and emotional quiver. Take that away and it's like a toddler deprived of his pacifier or his blankie. So the idiotic game of "not all Muslims", which would be unheard of in a society that hadn't degenerated into this childish, brain-dead literal-mindedness, is like the anxious toddler's reaction to the removal of his blankie - all that endlessly repetitive wailing is an attempt to deflect attention from big scary complexity and effect a return to the familiar and comforting, very simple world of West/America=Bad. And it's often successful. You know how often toddler puling and wailing destroys adult conversation.
It's also appallingly condescending and infantilizing to Muslims, but they'd have to have an actual adult mentality to see that. You can't really accuse an infant of infantilizing.
wv: merfish. Hallucinated by one very confused sailor.
Pogo has the last word. You can't beat that.
I just wanted to say that I thought she was about to say "between him and his God," but stopped and fished up "his psychiatrist." Such are the PC reflexes.
wv: crazi - I'm not kidding and I have the screen capture to prove it.
I think it's possible that she was trying to think of people with whom one has an expectation of confidentiality... your confessor, your therapist, and your publicist/agent etc.
However... it's like making a spelling error in a post ragging on someone for a misspelling. Williams is supposed to be expected to govern his speech, and while explaining how this was so, Vivian Schiller stuck her foot in her mouth up to the knee.
As for the rest of this "can't mention a Muslim connection to 9-11 no matter what because someone with think a statement is being made about all Muslims in the world, and if you add bits to explain you aren't counting the "good" Muslims or the "innocent" ones, you're damned double time"... It's Obama's fault.
It's Obama's fault because he doesn't see the need to call our enemies out. Yes, people were disgusted with Bush and his constant "Religion of Peace" pulpit pounding, but he named the enemy every bit as explicitly. With Obama we have mush since he's trying so hard to tone down the rhetoric. You tone it down and clarity is lost.
So we get this deliberate (and disgusting) need to conflate the smallest moment of fear that perhaps *those* apparently Muslim persons are radical extremists before it is suppressed and set aside, to a fear to travel with Muslim people... any Muslim person, any Saudi Prince, anyone at all.
Because now they are all the same.
And we get lectured by the very people/person who insists on doing this dishonest smearing of an entire race/religion/ethnicity on how we're the ones who are actually guilty of doing it.
It's bull crap of the highest order.
And it will continue to be so until our enlightened betters stop being afraid of an entire people group.
As for the rest of this "can't mention a Muslim connection to 9-11 no matter what because someone with think a statement is being made about all Muslims in the world, and if you add bits to explain you aren't counting the "good" Muslims or the "innocent" ones, you're damned double time"... It's Obama's fault.
Whats been lost in all this is that is about the 3rd time in a week the West has folded to complaints from Islam.
Dhimmitude.
because someone will think a statement is being made about all Muslims in the world, and if you add bits to explain you aren't counting the "good" Muslims or the "innocent" ones, you're damned double time"... It's Obama's fault.
I miss the good old days of WW I, the the Spanish-American War, the Civil War, the Franco-Prussian War, the Thirty Years War, the Hundred Years War, etc. etc., when there were only Christians to blame, and nobody felt afraid of people in Christian dress.
We can freely say, as we have for almost 70 years, that the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor, without tailoring our thoughts to fit the demanded Leftist template. We are not required to say, "On Dec 6th, 1941 a small group of extremist Japanese militarists, in no way representative of the vast majority of noble and peace-loving Japanese people, attacked us on 9/11."
I thought we learned from WW II that it was irrational to punish an entire people for the actions what we perceive to be certain members of their group. Or does C4 want to toss American Muslims into camps for the duration?
Libtard: I thought we learned from WW II that it was irrational to punish an entire people for the actions what we perceive to be certain members of their group
And there it is.
If Iran ever attacks the West with nukes, the American Left will not have the stomach to retaliate.
No worries. They'll be weeded out. The trick is to not stand too close to them.
I wonder what I would do right now if I were Mara Liasson. Resign from NPR in protest? Wait to be fired? Ignore it all?
Yeah, that psychiatrist crack pissed me off the most. But I gotta say, that's the liberal m.o. "You're clinically ill," that's why you're religious, or conservative, or whatever. It's gotten as rusty as that old chestnut "s/he's leaving to spend more time with his/her family."
But to see it used like this against one of their own, a minority, and someone who just put the tiniest hair over their newthink line, pissed me off anew.
Don't you just want to follow that bitch into the ladies' restroom and smack the hell out of her smug, bloodless, NPR fucking face?
I do.
fls@11:40: I miss the good old days of WW I, the the Spanish-American War, the Civil War, the Franco-Prussian War, the Thirty Years War, the Hundred Years War, etc. etc., when there were only Christians to blame, and nobody felt afraid of people in Christian dress.
fls@11:44: I thought we learned from WW II that it was irrational to punish an entire people for the actions what we perceive to be certain members of their group. Or does C4 want to toss American Muslims into camps for the duration?
Gee, fls, thanks for coming through with a most bee-yoo-ti-ful illustration of the assertion I made in my 8:19 comment. And kudos for being able to hold fast to the template while making no sense at all.
The Japanese internment example is actually quite good. FDR inferred very logically that the Japanese might be a threat and he dealt with it quickly. Yes, it was only the Oriental who was interred but, oddly, it was only the Japanese who had engaged in a sneak attack. Through the rear view mirror of history we get all sad about the internment but we also remember that there were very few Japanese attacks from within thereafter. Some lame balloon attacks using the Japanese current but other than those a few submarine incursions the war with Japan was fought in the pacific.
But I gotta say, that's the liberal m.o. "You're clinically ill," that's why you're religious, or conservative, or whatever
I still think it goes beyond that:
I think NPR CEO Vivian Schiller was disclosing Juan's private medical history to a national audience. Out of Malice.
Damn Limbic System.....it makes everyone stupid.
Another commenter pointed this out:
NPR uses feelings, state of mind, theories of feelings ALL THE TIME as long as it lines up with their ideology and where it takes them upon waves of popular sentiment and current events (see Terry Gross, gays, blacks, ...justice freedom equality...regardless of principled disagreement).
Like all true believers (and true believers and ideologues in the public realm) they fail to see the limits and consequences of their own thinking.
Everything else is "crazy."
jamboree @2:05 AM said...
"Don't you just want to follow that bitch into the ladies' restroom and smack the hell out of her smug, bloodless, NPR fucking face?"
Don't you just want to denounce evil expressions of thuggery like jamboree's?
I do
Michael,
I believe Germans and Italians were also detained in WWI and WWII.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_internment
Germans and Italians were also detained in WWI and WWII.
Germans and Italians were not interned simply for being German or Italian. Half the country would have had to have been interned if so.
Just like Japanese-Americans in Hawaii were not interned -- there were too many of them and the place would have been shut down.
You will parse any statement to make your same nonsensical, argumentative pliberal points, fls. Jeez.
@Meade
Go on and get your passive aggressive self-righteous prig on. It's fine by me.
Post a Comment