Skip to main content

View Diary: Juan Williams' tongue is healing nicely (166 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Who says donors to the Socialist Workers (0+ / 0-)

    Party shouldn't be divulged?

    And, how does that organization compare to the US Chamber of Commerce when it comes to influencing legislation in Congress and political parties?

    It's a known fact that the CoC was behind the recent failure of the disclosure legislation in the Senate (unless you get your "facts" from Fraud Newz).  I haven't heard any such influence exerted by the organization you cite.  How does the membership compare?  The US CoC claims 3 million members (which is bullshit, btw) -- how many members are in the SWP?

    And sofuhkingwhat if federal funds go to the CPB or NPR?  Federal TAXPAYER funds go to subsidize Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Insurance, and WS -- what's the difference?

    •  You're clearly having an argument (0+ / 0-)

      with someone, but that someone isn't me, or anything I wrote. I repeat: I am in favor of disclosure rules.

      •  You certainly have an odd way of saying what (0+ / 0-)

        you mean, then.

        Why use the false equivalency analogy to make your point?

        Williams is a bigot and a fool, not necessarily in that order, either.  The fact that he's being embraced by Fraud Newz is enuf evidence of that.

        •  Different kettle: (0+ / 0-)

          IMO, based on years of interested listening, Williams is far from either a bigot or a fool, and NPR did itself a vast disservice by firing him. His "embrace" by Fox News, even if only a clever ploy, actually shows that they are more willing than NPR to tolerate a voice largely to the left of what's apparently their usual fare (truthfully, I wouldn't know first hand; I never watch Fox, or any other commercial network's, news programs).

          •  You're either naive or disingenuous. (0+ / 0-)

            You say Fraud Newz is "tolerating a voice . . . to the left of . . . their usual fare" yet admit you don't watch it, which begs the question, how do you know what political opinions JW expresses when he is on FNC and how do they differ from what he says on NPR when the conservative bullies aren't around to intimidate him?  I've heard him on both venues and he blows with the wind -- he's defensive, uncertain, accomodating, and apologetic when it comes to liberal viewpoints on NPR, and a sympathetic voice for conservatives on FNC -- the worst kind of journalism.

            You, apparently, believe the "fair and balanced" canard that Fraud Newz trumpets for itself, in spite of the fact that the number of commentators it has on its payroll that can even come close to being middle of the road can be counted on one hand.

            And, why do Republican candidates prefer to appear EXCLUSIVELY on FNC to answer the softball questions they're so conveniently fed?

            NPR should have canned JW's ass long ago.  Their only mistake has been trying to play both sides of the issue instead of sticking to journalistic ethical integrity.

            •  As I said (0+ / 0-)

              "apparently." And what you take to be wishy-washy, I have understood to be nuanced. At this point, I think we agree to disagree and let it be. Ciao.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site