pacino wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Pacino, you couldn't be more wrong. Juan Williams simply is not a bigot.

The thing is, even if you are a Card Carrying member of the PC police, you should recognize the Juan Williams is more than entitled to the benefit of the doubt here. He has a long and distinguished track record on these issues. More the liberal bias, I fear this reveals that the NPR latte sippers ensconced in their de facto whites only enclaves driving through scary parts of town that aren't gated really have no interest in the realities of civil rights and instead are primarily concerned with feeling good about how tolerant and open minded they all are.

I don't know how many of you listen to NPR programming regularly--I do like Talk of the Nation, and I still think Nina Totenberg is an outstanding reporter who covers the Supreme Court and the Judiciary better than anyone else. But so much of it is now almost indistinguishable from "The Delicious Dish" that if it goes away I doubt many would miss it.

your characterization of the listenership of npr is quite ridiculous. I'm not going to get into why. Williams made a bigoted statement...it's impossible to deny it. That may float on fox, but it obviously doesn't for his former employer.

In any event, he can now fully becone a fake liberal on fox and will make his millions. Kudos, juan.

I'm not sure how deep into this I want to get, even though I originally posted the link. Here goes some good time wasting...

I'm trying to think of a comparison. Is it bigoted to say when walking down the street at night, I get nervous if a group of black guys in their late teens wearing hoodies is walking toward me? More worried than I would if they were white, way more worried than I would if they were girls and not guys, far more worried than I would if they were wearing pastel polo shirts. So 2 parts racist, 4 parts sexist, 5 parts fashion critic. Or is that just basic risk assessment/self preservation? Or bigotry being justified as risk assessment?

I don't know, but by your standard I think I've just said something that's obviously bigoted. It's not like Williams was calling for Muslims to be barred from airplanes or even to be subjected to profiling as far as I can tell. He was just saying he personally gets nervous and worried. If we can't talk openly about fears or biases without provoking a googoo PC backlash, it's not going to make these issues go away. NPR making something beyond the pale for public discussion doesn't exactly solve anything. Fucking embarrassing move on their part.

jerseyhoya wrote:If we can't talk openly about fears or biases without provoking a googoo PC backlash, it's not going to make these issues go away.

TRUTH

jerseyhoya wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:On a whole nother topic--JH, here's a freebie idea for future research--I think the the increase of partisanship that has been observed in Congress over the last few decades has more to do with the fact that there is no permanent minority party. That is, if you were a Republican member of Congress while the New Deal coalition prevailed, you have every reason to work with Dems and compromise--if you didn't, you'd get nothing. Now, however, when you find yourself in the minority (whether you're R or D) you have every incentive to hold out because your minority status is unlikely to be permanent.

It seems so obviously a better explanation than Fox News or Glenn Beck, I'm sure someone has already done this.

TV, Hoya could spark a cross-disciplinary game theory nerdfest with this. Are there practitioners/adherents at Rutgers?

It's a really interesting idea. I'm not entirely sure how to capture it quantitatively though. Maybe someone like Ross Baker could interview a bunch of current and former members about motivations, but I'm having a hard time of thinking of variables that could get past simple correlation.

There are some widely accepted measures of Congressional partisanship. The interesting part of the study would be how to measure anticipated competitiveness of party control of the chamber. (JH--there's nothing wrong with using basic stats if hypothesis and theory are compelling enough--look at critical election theory.) But I don't think that's impossible. I really don't know the literature on Congress very well at all.

It would be even more fascinating if the theoretical behavior was as predicted and individual members of Congress denied that the anticipation of a switch in control had anything to do with their attitudes towards working across the aisle.

There are a bunch of dimensions in all this to look at as well--the changing composition of the parties over time, particularly the dissolution of Southern Democratic hegemony.

jerseyhoya wrote:

pacino wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Pacino, you couldn't be more wrong. Juan Williams simply is not a bigot.

The thing is, even if you are a Card Carrying member of the PC police, you should recognize the Juan Williams is more than entitled to the benefit of the doubt here. He has a long and distinguished track record on these issues. More the liberal bias, I fear this reveals that the NPR latte sippers ensconced in their de facto whites only enclaves driving through scary parts of town that aren't gated really have no interest in the realities of civil rights and instead are primarily concerned with feeling good about how tolerant and open minded they all are.

I don't know how many of you listen to NPR programming regularly--I do like Talk of the Nation, and I still think Nina Totenberg is an outstanding reporter who covers the Supreme Court and the Judiciary better than anyone else. But so much of it is now almost indistinguishable from "The Delicious Dish" that if it goes away I doubt many would miss it.

your characterization of the listenership of npr is quite ridiculous. I'm not going to get into why. Williams made a bigoted statement...it's impossible to deny it. That may float on fox, but it obviously doesn't for his former employer.

In any event, he can now fully becone a fake liberal on fox and will make his millions. Kudos, juan.

I'm not sure how deep into this I want to get, even though I originally posted the link. Here goes some good time wasting...

I'm trying to think of a comparison. Is it bigoted to say when walking down the street at night, I get nervous if a group of black guys in their late teens wearing hoodies is walking toward me? More worried than I would if they were white, way more worried than I would if they were girls and not guys, far more worried than I would if they were wearing pastel polo shirts. So 2 parts racist, 4 parts sexist, 5 parts fashion critic. Or is that just basic risk assessment/self preservation? Or bigotry being justified as risk assessment?

I don't know, but by your standard I think I've just said something that's obviously bigoted. It's not like Williams was calling for Muslims to be barred from airplanes or even to be subjected to profiling as far as I can tell. He was just saying he personally gets nervous and worried. If we can't talk openly about fears or biases without provoking a googoo PC backlash, it's not going to make these issues go away. NPR making something beyond the pale for public discussion doesn't exactly solve anything. FUNNER embarrassing move on their part.

And again--Juan Williams deserves and has earned the benefit of the doubt here regarding his intentions and what he said. There's a pretty admirable track record both as a journalist and as an advocate of civil rights. To discount that over one statement is absolutely ridiculous. Pacino is reacting like Juan Williams was Howard Stern here and that simply isn't the case.

If NPR listeners aren't as I described, then NPR has a lot more to worry about than the loss of government funding. I've been an NPR contributor in the past, but it's unlikely that I'd consider contributing to them in the future.

In my view, Juan Williams (Talk of the Nation was the best news program they have) and Nina Totenberg were the reasons to listen to NPR.

Whos saying we cant talk about stuff? He was fired; no one silenced the man who reaches millions of households a day to say very little of value these days. He's not howard stern and perhaps he should realize how dumb his irrational bigoted feeling is...and HE should learn from this, not the so-called 'pc crowd'.
No one in muslim 'garb' has blown anyone or anything up in the us. You have nothing to fear juan. And yes hoya, yours is a bigoted idea too. We all have bigoted thoughts and to deny this is pretty lame. Perhaps he should've been suspended but then he chose to double down and say he didn't utter something bigoted. What an utter pile of crap...insert group name here and see how it sounds.

Again, tv, for you to assume that npr listeners all live in lily white enclaves 'sipping latees' is pretty bigoted in itself. Maybe thats hoe it is where you live, but not where i do. But whatever, ive said my piece now.

According to NPR Profile 2009

Median age: 50
Education: 60% have bachelor's degree (national avg is 25%) and are three times more likely than avg. American to have a graduate degree
Race and Ethnicity: 86% white, 5% African American
Median Income: $86,000 (national avg is $55K)
66% married
42% have no children

Nope. No profile there.

Whats your fucking point ass

That you are, as always, talking out of yours.

Kiss my ass. Thanks.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=occih60Y6fk[/youtube]

VoxOrion wrote:According to NPR Profile 2009

Median age: 50
Education: 60% have bachelor's degree (national avg is 25%) and are three times more likely than avg. American to have a graduate degree
Race and Ethnicity: 86% white, 5% African American
Median Income: $86,000 (national avg is $55K)
66% married
42% have no children

Nope. No profile there.

Vox, did they have a latte sipping estimate? I'm guessing around 72%. Their own profile revels in how superior their listeners are.

As usual with politics, I will comment as an unbiased, unknowledgeable peon who has no stake in any team.

I don't know who this "Juan" guy is. Is he a reporter, or a "Talking Head"? If he's a straight reporter, it is perfectly reasonable for his employer to take the action they did. A reporter has an obligation to maintain a facade of fairness and impartiality, no matter what his/her real feelings are. To express personal opinions like this could undermine his credbility and throw doubt to his partiality.

Is he allowed to have an opinion? Sure. But it should not be expressed on a public stage like that. There are lots of professions who need to control their public opinion. How about it a judge said that? Or someone in the TSA? How about if Joe West said "I can't stand <player>, he's a douchebag" ? Even if it was someone who is widely regarded as such by fans and teammates alike? Not good.

Now do I think the remark was bigoted? Not really. We're conditioned by media to think that muslims are terrorist, black dudes in hoodies are trouble, italians with new york accents are drunk rude idiots, and deadheads are all druggies. I believe it's more your actions when faced with these embedded stereotypes which defines whether you're a bigot or not.

I need a Chris Christie thread

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYGvRj8Z8t4[/youtube]

Goddamn

jerseyhoya wrote:I need a Chris Christie thread

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYGvRj8Z8t4[/youtube]

Goddamn

Legacy: He saved me a few bucks.

"We're one state, the State of New Jersey." That's BS-they're not even funding the majority of the project.

He's good at saying no. I'll give him that. If that's really what you want in a Governor, then he's a great man.

If you consider the percentage of the funding for the PA of NY/NJ the state's residents are responsible for, we're comfortably paying the majority of the project, Swish.

Zogby has Runyan up three

Not that I'm going to get excited by that, because Zogby is the Jim Caple of the political polling universe, but at least it's not one of his completely useless online Interactive polls, so it might have some value.

My dad's been putting in a good bit of time volunteering at Runyan headquarters. He has thus far resisted my suggestions to wear a NY Giants shirt/hat to the office.

Bucky wrote:As usual with politics, I will comment as an unbiased, unknowledgeable peon who has no stake in any team.

I don't know who this "Juan" guy is. Is he a reporter, or a "Talking Head"? If he's a straight reporter, it is perfectly reasonable for his employer to take the action they did. A reporter has an obligation to maintain a facade of fairness and impartiality, no matter what his/her real feelings are. To express personal opinions like this could undermine his credbility and throw doubt to his partiality.

Is he allowed to have an opinion? Sure. But it should not be expressed on a public stage like that. There are lots of professions who need to control their public opinion. How about it a judge said that? Or someone in the TSA? How about if Joe West said "I can't stand <player>, he's a douchebag" ? Even if it was someone who is widely regarded as such by fans and teammates alike? Not good.

Now do I think the remark was bigoted? Not really. We're conditioned by media to think that muslims are terrorist, black dudes in hoodies are trouble, italians with new york accents are drunk rude idiots, and deadheads are all druggies. I believe it's more your actions when faced with these embedded stereotypes which defines whether you're a bigot or not.

He was a news analyst for NPR, so that would suggest that he would have more latitude to express his opinion than a reporter. NPR's big hangup with him was that he spent too much time on Fox, and didn't always toe the party line. This was an excuse to get rid of him. One of his beefs is that they have had actual reporters on NPR express much more caustic personal opinions in public without retribution. Another is that the head of NPR alluded to him only needing to share his opinion with his psychiatrist (she smirked when she said it), which he rightfully deemed an unnecessary personal attack.

VoxOrion wrote:According to NPR Profile 2009

Median age: 50
Education: 60% have bachelor's degree (national avg is 25%) and are three times more likely than avg. American to have a graduate degree
Race and Ethnicity: 86% white, 5% African American
Median Income: $86,000 (national avg is $55K)
66% married
42% have no children

Nope. No profile there.

I have no strong feeling about whether Williams should have been fired one way or the other. In fact, I would incline toward, "Should not have been fired." Smacks of the thought police, and in general I don't think what we need more of in politics/media is punishment for being honest, because all that leads to is the scripted "debates" we get between Presidential candidates, as everyone is walking on eggshells trying to avoid making a mistake. That was one of the refreshing things about Obama, actually: he would say what he was actually thinking. Got him into trouble a few times ("guns/religion/clinging"), but it was better than just repeating the same 7 things all the time, like they are pretty much trained to do now. And anyway, I don't think expressing a concern like Williams' is on a par with the crap Don Imus has repeatedly said/done and gotten away with, for example.

But I don't understand what point it is this post is trying to make.

mozartpc27 wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:According to NPR Profile 2009

Median age: 50
Education: 60% have bachelor's degree (national avg is 25%) and are three times more likely than avg. American to have a graduate degree
Race and Ethnicity: 86% white, 5% African American
Median Income: $86,000 (national avg is $55K)
66% married
42% have no children

Nope. No profile there.

I have no strong feeling about whether Williams should have been fired one way or the other. In fact, I would incline toward, "Should not have been fired." Smacks of the thought police, and in general I don't think what we need more of in politics/media is punishment for being honest, because all that leads to is the scripted "debates" we get between Presidential candidates, as everyone is walking on eggshells trying to avoid making a mistake. That was one of the refreshing things about Obama, actually: he would say what he was actually thinking. Got him into trouble a few times ("guns/religion/clinging"), but it was better than just repeating the same 7 things all the time, like they are pretty much trained to do now. And anyway, I don't think expressing a concern like Williams' is on a par with the crap Don Imus has repeatedly said/done and gotten away with, for example.

But I don't understand what point it is this post is trying to make.

That profile is more likely to represent your average latte drinker than a latino with a high school degree that makes $30000 a year in a blue collar job.

Joe Sestak again coming through with a great ad campaign