What to take away from the firing of Juan Williams

There is no question that liberal news agencies, like many liberals themselves, claim that they love the First Amendment. That they want to have all views shared, voiced in every format possible. In fact they have gone as far as trying to create laws forcing television and media outlets to carry “equal time” for their views. That is perhaps the biggest clue as to why Juan Williams was fired, and what is the true thoughts held.

NPR has stated clearly that they fired Juan Williams, the only Black news analyst at NPR, because

“News analysts may not take personal public positions on controversial issues; doing so undermines their credibility as analysts, and that’s what’s happened in this situation.”

But the real story is what else they are not stating as publicly, that

“We’re profoundly sorry that this happened during fundraising week. Juan’s comments were made Monday night and we did not feel it would be responsible to delay this action.”

Though the firing took place 36 hours after the fact, without giving Williams any opportunity to plead his case. And that

“the largely conservative and often contentious prime-time talk shows of Fox News have long been a sore point with NPR News executives”.

It goes even further.

In February 2009, NPR asked that Williams stop being identified on “The O’Reilly Factor” as a “senior correspondent for NPR,” even though that title was accurate at the time, The New York Times reported.

So an organization, which received reportedly $1.8 million from George Soros – a noted far-left advocate and source of several anti-Conservative organizations funding – just a week ago, that opposed Juan Williams appearing on FOX News and was upset about potentially adverse affects to political fundraising, fired Juan Williams for his fellings. Not only that, but NPR’s CEO then went about casting aspersions about Mr. Williams mental stability.

Effectively they tried to burn him, and destroy his credibility. Because they don’t like FOX News.

The result is clear. Liberal organizations like NPR love open discussion, IF and only if, it is in line with the opinion they hold. If not, well then those other voices can and will be removed as quickly as possible.

It’s a viewpoint that has been repeated over and over again. It’s a viewpoint that politicians like Represntative Maurice Hinchey has displayed as the campaign rejected specific press from coverage of President Clinton’s visit, and why they refuse to answer simple questions regarding facts stated publicly by Rep. Hinchey. Because they like certain voices, and cannot bear to even listen to opposing views.

This is not all Liberals, or all liberal organizations. But it is far too many. They shut out anything that is not exactly how they say it should be. Just consider the coverage of the Tea Party over the past 2 years – even as it has grown in popularity, impact, and patronage. Consider the attacks made on Sarah Palin, AFTER the 2008 election to this day. Consider how N.O.W. has endorsed and supported Jerry Brown and the declaration of Meg Whitman as a “whore”.

Examples abound. NPR is sadly not unique. They are just the latest organization that is enforcing the mantra – ‘say what we think, or you won’t work’. Not exactly embracing the First Amendment is it?

Only your support allows us to provide mid-term election coverage, political event coverage, and our political commentary. Visit Alchemy at World of VASS, and/or World of Vass, and/or our store on eBay – help keep us going. We appreciate your support.

About the Author

Michael Vass
Born in 1968, a political commentator for over a decade. Has traveled the U.S. and lived in Moscow and Tsblisi, A former stockbroker and 2014 Congressional candidate. Passionate about politics with emphasis on 1st and 2nd Amendments.

Be the first to comment on "What to take away from the firing of Juan Williams"

Thank you for lending your voice. We appreciate hearing what you have to say.

%d bloggers like this: