Video: Is Juan Williams closer to switching sides?

Juan Williams is a bit of a conundrum; he makes ridiculous left-wing arguments that make you want to scream but he somehow maintains a characteristic of likability and gets along quite well with those whom he disagrees with. At some point, one would think he would wake up and free himself from the grips of left-wing ideology. Perhaps the best case in point was when he was fired by NPR for expressing an opinion about how he felt with sharing a plane with passengers that consisted of men in Muslim garb.

Fox News didn't fire him; it embraced him.

That leads to this very interesting interview between Williams and Ginni Thomas (wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas). As I watched Williams in this interview, I found myself asking one simple question:

How is it that you can have this perspective and yet still be liberal?

For some reason, Juan has identified and acknowledged the groupthink dynamic in the liberal media while not seeing the corresponding flaws in all of liberalism's premises. He doesn't seem to understand that the reason groupthink exists is because liberalism can't exist without it.

One interesting takeaway from the interview happens at the beginning when Williams makes an Archie Bunker reference, admitting that he used to believe that character represented conservatives. As an example of Williams not connecting one more dot, the man who created Archie Bunker's character (Norman Lear) is a hardcore liberal, which makes Bunker a caricature (not just a character) of the right, created with left-wing bias and preconceptions.

It would seem that Williams isn't far from an awakening. Then again, I thought the same thing after he was fired by NPR.

Via Daily Caller:

Video: Juan Williams tells Michelle Malkin he's a 'real reporter' and 'not a blogger'

This exchange between Michelle Malkin and Juan Williams came one day after Joe Scarborough, the man whose checks are signed by the propaganda arm of the Obama administration - MSNBC - lumped conservative bloggers into one big pot before ridiculing them for being ineffective and irrelevant. Translation? Those conservative bloggers are pretty darned effective and relevant.

Fast forward one day later. While discussing the White House national security leaks, Williams felt it necessary to identify himself as a 'real reporter' and 'not a blogger.' Naturally, Malkin to offense at this and then proceeded to thoroughly shred Williams for his condescension and for being - among other things - a 'snotty... liberal elite journalist'. The best part is that Williams proves her point with his condescending eye rolls in response.

The good news? A common theme is developing among the liberal media. The conservative bloggers are winning and people like Scarborough and Williams secretly know it. Whenever they ridicule bloggers, it's reflective of their inability to admit it publicly. The most egregious example is Fast and Furious. After 18 months, the truth about the scandal - as well as the truth about how the liberal media covered it up - is coming out.

This is an instant classic. Is it racist to enjoy watching a filipino, conservative, female, blogger rip a black, liberal 'real reporter' to shreds?

Instant classic via MediaIte:

Video: Juan Williams Plays Race Card with Newt, gets Smacked Down

Possibly the best part of the debate. Juan Williams attempts to subtly intimidate Newt Gingrich by implying that the former Speaker made racist comments. Instead of relenting and re-phrasing his argument, Gingrich made Williams look foolish. Then, Juan attempted to push the issue after being thoroughly embarrassed. It didn't work. Newt hit him again.

Via Breitbart:

Video: Liberal Juan Williams Spins for Eric Holder over Project Gunrunner

This is an absolutely shameful performance by Juan Williams on Fox News Sunday, along with some disappointing assumptions made by Brit Hume and Stephen Hayes. Mara Liasson didn't wade too deep into any cogent analysis but implied, if ever so slightly, that the reason for the scandal could have been the fact that ATF has been operating with an 'acting Director' and not a confirmed one. That one is straight from the liberal talking points and NPR doesn't like Mara going too far off the reservation during her Fox appearances.

First up, Brit Hume. Very early in this segment, Hume asserts that Gunrunner is a real scandal and that the Justice Department reminds him of Nixon's DOJ. Then, Hume disappoints slightly at the end when Bret Baier asks him about the operation having anything to do with the Obama administration's gun control agenda. Instead of saying, 'I hope not' or 'I can see where someone might get that idea' or 'we'll have to wait and see,' Hume demurs and pooh poohs the notion. While doing so, however, he noticeably lowers his voice, which could express doubt. Then again, that's a question for Tanya Reiman.

Stephen Hayes makes some good points but extends Holder too much grace when he says that the Attorney General's motives were noble and that he implemented Fast and Furious to get bigger drug cartel fish after the Bush administration had very limited success. The problem with that assessment is that the evidence is increasingly pointing to that merely being the stated objective, not the actual one. Perhaps Hayes should review all the reportage on this story; it started back in late December with Sipsey Street and David Codrea. In particular, he should look at the comment from Agent John Dodson who said he was told 'if you want to make an omelette, you have to scramble some eggs' by one of his supervisors. That can mean many things, including: 'If you want gun control, innocent people have to die.' Both Hayes and Hume punted a bit.

Now for Juan Williams. This guy would be a good spinmeister if he picked his battles better. Defending Eric Holder by saying that people have been after him for a long time and that this is all political, is unmatched hackery. He then lists several reasons why people don't like Holder. Unwittingly, Williams made the case that maybe Holder is just a bad guy by listing those things but he was too busy defending Holder to notice.



h/t Sipsey Street

Video: Juan Williams Responds to NPR Sting Video

With all that Juan Williams has been in the middle of over the last year or so, you'd think he'd be destined to convert to conservatism at some point. First, he's fired by NPR for expressing his true feelings when he sees Muslims on the same plane as him; he's then promoted by the Fox News Channel; now, courtesy of another James O'Keefe orchestrated sting video, NPR CEO Ron Schiller is caught being, well, racist.

This episode might put Williams over the top.

Here is Williams on Hannity, responding to the video.

Part 1:



Part 2:



h/t Weasel Zippers

NPR CHANGING ITS TUNE ON IMPORTANCE OF PUBLIC FUNDING

After firing Juan Williams, NPR President and CEO Vivian Schiller attempted to dismiss the notion that de-funding her organization would have minimal effect because taxpayer dollars account for so little of NPR's income - most of their money comes from donations and such a move would be virtually inconsequential. The line of thinking was one of, 'you can go ahead and defund us but it'll just be a waste of your time and it will have minimal impact on us.'

That particular tune appears to be changing. Now, Schiller is almost pleading that NPR not be defunded, not because of what it would do to her or NPR itself but what it would do to the little NPR's.

Via the Daily Caller:

Speaking at St. John’s Episcopal Church in Washington Sunday on the “Future of Journalism,” National Public Radio President and CEO Vivian Schiller said she takes calls for defunding NPR “very seriously,” while stressing how important government funding is for public broadcasting, especially for NPR’s member stations. She also recognized there’s a possibility that, with the new GOP majority in the House, those calls for defunding might be renewed.

“If defunding to public broadcasting were to occur, it would be devastating to public broadcasting. That’s a fact,” Schiller said.

After Schiller fired commentator Juan Williams several weeks ago for comments he made about Muslims on Fox News’ “O’Reilly Factor,” calls for defunding NPR erupted again.

“Almost all federal funding goes to member stations,” Schiller said. “Very, very little of it goes to NPR, but a lot goes to stations.”

While NPR headquarters only receives about 1 percent of funding from tax dollars, member stations receive about 9 percent of their funding from tax dollars, Schiller said. She said that the 9 percent NPR member stations receive from taxpayer dollars is essential for them to stay on the air.

“For small stations, and even for large stations, that’s a big chunk of their revenue,” she said. “It’s been a critical part of keeping those stations vibrant and, so, we take these calls for defunding very, very seriously.”

This is eerily similar to the arguments Democrats / Liberals make when you start talking about defunding local governments. What do they invariably say? They accuse the other side of being responsible for cutting police departments and education.

Perhaps the quintessentially ironic moment was that Schiller pointed to the intelligence of NPR listeners by holding up the comment section at the bottom of the "balloon boy" story as a shining example of their superior intellect.

“We have a comment section under our blog posts, just like every other news organization,” Schiller said. “If you look at most comment sections, they are usually pretty disappointing, you know, people yelling at each other, going off subject, there’s a lot of hand-wringing in the comment section.”

The comments on NPR’s blog post about the balloon boy, Schiller said, set NPR’s audience apart from everyone else. She then proceeded to read two comments as an example.

Nothing like pointing to a story that pales in insignificance to what important things are going on in the world. Then again, how could CAIR object to stories about balloon boy?

Perhaps if NPR wasn't so seemingly beholden to the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the group who demanded - and received - action from NPR over Williams' comments, taxpayers wouldn't object so much.

h/t Gateway Pundit

VIDEO: JOY BEHAR CITES 'MEDIA MATTER' WHILE SAYING NPR BALANCED

This attempt at citing a source was so pathetic, even Joy Behar couldn't carry it through to the finish line. She stopped on the last letter of the group 'Media Matters' which is perhaps the most far left group in America today. Instead she says 'Media Matter type groups' when citing a source for someone who has determined that NPR is 'very balanced, unlike Fox.' Media Matters is an arm of George Soros while Behar calls Fox the 'arm of the Republican Party.'

Let's re-cap. Juan Williams, a devout yet polite liberal is fired from NPR for innocuous comments he made about his own personal reaction to being on a plane with others wearing 'Muslim garb.' Williams is obviously too far right for NPR who has absolutely ZERO conservative viewpoints working there.

Conversely, Juan Williams (liberal) has been a contributor to Fox for years. Fox has plenty of liberal commentators. In fact, both sides are represented in debates. Bob Beckel, Kirstin Powers, Alan Colmes, Jason Levine, Leslie Marshall, just to name a few. Let's also not forget that Shepard Smith is a liberal too and he has his own show(s) on Fox.

h/t Weasel Zippers

NPR CHIEF EXECUTIVE NOW SAYS JUAN WILLIAMS UNETHICAL

Not sure if this was an attempt to walk back her suggestion that newly fired news analyst Juan Williams seek the help of his 'psychiatrist' or to just pile on. Either way, NPR Chief Executive Vivian Schiller probably would have been better off if she'd have put the shovel down. Instead, after hitting rock bottom, she continues to dig. What further proof does one need to conclude that the left uses matters of race to further an agenda, not promote equality?

Vivian Schiller apparently felt compelled to clarify her 'psychiatrist' remark by granting the New York Times an interview. Here is what Schiller said:

The reason that we terminated his contract is because of our news ethics guidelines.

The guidelines are based on the same news ethics guidelines of the Society of Professional Journalists, and are very similar to that of The New York Times and many other news organizations.

He had several times in the past violated our news code of ethics with things that he had said on other people’s air. I’m not aware of any problem with any things he has said on our air. In each of those instances, we called him on it; we had a discussion; we asked him not to do it again. It happened several times. What happened a few days ago was the latest in a series of incidents.

I can’t characterize that this was better or worse or less egregious or more egregious than any other time. The point is, this was the latest in a series of incidents.

You give people second chances — we’re big believers in that and we do it all the time — but it happened again and again. And so we made the decision at this point that we had to draw the line somewhere.

A reasonable person could say, “Well why didn’t you make the decision last time this time or the time before?” Or, “Why didn’t you wait until the next time?” Fair enough.

We made the decision here because, at a certain point, if someone keeps not following your guidance, you have to make a break. And that’s what we did. And that is the sole reason.

No, Ms. Schiller; you made the decision this time because you were intimidated by the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), an Islamic group with ties to nefarious terror organizations.

The CAIR issue was addressed in the New York Times article as well:

Some critics of the firing have questioned whether NPR caved in to pressure from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR for short. The group, which advocates for Muslims, released a statement on Wednesday calling on NPR to address Mr. Williams’s comments on Fox, and a few hours later the termination decision was announced.

“I have actually not seen the statement from CAIR,” Ms. Schiller said Friday evening. “We don’t make decisions like this based on influence. We don’t make decisions based either on political pressure or financial pressure. That’s not the way we make decisions like this. They’re based on own ethics and our own news values at NPR.”

Gee, I wonder if lying is acceptable under NPR's ethics. They were shown to have done so in their dealings with Steve Emerson in 1998 over a very similar issue involving another Muslim group, the Arab American Action Network (AAAN) Vice president Ali Abunimah.

h/t Gateway Pundit

NPR FIRES JUAN WILLIAMS FOR MUSLIM COMMENT

Your tax dollars at work. National Public Radio is a far left, taxpayer-funded media propaganda enterprise that has actually fired one of its biggest advocates for actually speaking his mind and being honest. Juan Williams is a regular contributor to the Fox News Channel whose leftwing views often lead to uncontrollable eye-rolling on the part of those watching and listening but he's one of the more likable libs if nothing else.

What on earth did he say that NPR so objected to? Muslims on a plane make him nervous. Via the New York Times:

The move came after Mr. Williams, who is also a Fox News political analyst, appeared on the “The O’Reilly Factor” on Monday. On the show, the host, Bill O’Reilly, asked him to respond to the notion that the United States was facing a “Muslim dilemma.” Mr. O’Reilly said, “The cold truth is that in the world today jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet.”

Mr. Williams said he concurred with Mr. O’Reilly.

He continued: “I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

This is what happens when taxpayer dollars fund media enterprises - or practically anything else for that matter. That enterprise goes completely off the tracks. Being honest gets you fired at NPR. Let's not forget another NPR / Fox News Contributor, Mara Liasson, who in late 2009 was reigned in by NPR who was 'concerned' about her appearances on the Fox News Channel.

Potential upside? Now that Juan is no longer on the government dole, perhaps he'll see what's wrong with socialism. Stay tuned.

Via The Blaze, here is the video of the comments that got Juan in trouble. Go figure, the one time I agree with Williams and NPR fires him.



NPR website

VIDEO: JUAN WILLIAMS DOES IT AGAIN - REVEALS TRUE SELF

The phenomenon that is Juan Williams just continues to un-mask itself. The arguments this guy has been putting up lately are so literally absurd, objective viewers are left with only one conclusion - conflict of interest. The conflict is the fact that Juan Williams is paid with taxpayer dollars, as an employee of NPR.

At issue in his debate with Bill Kristol on Fox News Sunday is the revealing of emails belonging to a Goldman Sachs CEO. Kristol makes the point that Michigan Senator Carl Levin (D) has no right to make such an email public. Williams then compares Levin to a boss who has every right to access an employee's email.

Justifiably, Kristol goes on offense, reminding Williams that a Senator is not the boss of any businessman. Instead of conceding the point, Williams deflects by making some lame argument about stockholders and investors. Williams is increasingly revealing himself as a Big Government hack who is defending the entity he thinks is his boss (Big Government) without realizing who really is - the U.S. tax payer.

This is another amazing un-masking of Juan WIlliams.

via MediaITE

VIDEO: BRIGITTE GABRIEL VS. JUAN WILLIAMS ON HANNITY

Sent in by Barrackaid #7. Juan Williams needs to look up the word, "Dhimmi". He is heading toward being one. Based on the apoplectic look on his face as ACT for America's Brigitte Gabriel slapped him with cold hard facts, we now see Williams in another realm he completely doesn't understand. Williams has been getting utterly punk'd in every debate he engages in lately. He used to get by with his smooth, congenial arguments but no more.

He's exposing himself as completely misguided on a lot of things, not the least of which is Islam. Hats off to Hannity for having Gabriel on his show.

VIDEO: JUAN WILLIAMS EVOLVING INTO WHACK JOB

A funny thing seems to happen the more polarized this nation gets - moderates appear to find themselves in the position of having to choose sides - they usually move left. After all, they are moderates. On the Republican side, David Frum seems to be distancing himself from the conservative movement on a near daily basis. Juan Williams, the normally likable Fox News Contributor seems to be doing the same thing. Like Frum, he's outwardly moving left but unlike Frum, he's doing so from what was already a moderately leftwing perspective.

NewsBusters has the video of Williams defending the words of Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO while being interviewed by Stuart Varney. Take note of the words Trumka said that Williams seemed to either agree with or apologize for:

"There are forces in our country that are working hard to convert justifiable anger about an economy that only seems to work for a few of us into racist and homophobic hate and violence directed at our President and heroes like Congressman John Lewis. Most of all, those forces of hate seek to divide working people -- to turn our anger against each other."

Williams is the same guy who referred to the Gadsden flag as "Timothy McVeigh imagery". Now we have him defending the words of Richard Trumka while seemingly on-board with the Value Added Tax (VAT). At one point, Varney challenges Williams on his support of these far left policies of the administration while the referring to Williams as a "centrist Democrat". Williams' response was incredibly telling; he basically says he doesn't view the policies as taking America towards "far left socialism". Varney, having experienced such a thing firsthand, obviously disagrees.

The good news is that the true views of moderates like Williams are becoming known. Should Williams' views be all that surprising? As someone who works for NPR, he's already collecting taxpayer funded paychecks. Of course he loves taxes!

h/t to Free Republic

VIDEO: KRISTOL SLAMS OBAMA WAR STRATEGY

I don't know what the best part of this video is. It's either the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol making mincemeat of the leftwing strategy of dealing with islamic terrorists or the apoplectic look on the face of NPR's Juan Williams. Kristol's point is that the underwear bomber IS a "smoking gun" who can unequivocally provide actionable intelligence. Yet with an administration that has endorsed the civilian trial of the mastermind of 9/11, that underwear bomber is likely going to lawyer up and not have to comment.

The look on Juan Willams' face throughout Kristol's point-making reveals a succession of mis-firing synapses.



h/t to NB

VIDEO: ZO NAILS WARREN BALLANTINE

More repurcussions from O'Reilly's segement moderating a debate between Juan Williams and Warren Ballantine over the Rush Limbaugh-buying-the-Rams story. Williams was on the right side of the debate while Ballantine took the racist view not only of Rush but of Juan, telling him to "go back to the porch".

Now we have none other than Zo chiming in. Stay tuned until the two-minute mark, at which point Zo goes on an in-your-face diatribe directed at the likes of Ballantine.



h/t to JAWA

VIDEO: JUAN WILLIAMS AN UNCLE TOM?

You know it's gotten bad when conservatives who normally roll their eyes at the points made by Juan Williams suddenly find themselves in the position of having to defend him against racists like Warren Ballantine who love to play the game of, "Heads I win, tails you lose".

Translation? If you agree with him, he's right. If you disagree with him, you're wrong.

Utterly pathetic that it's fallen to this level. So many thanks must go to our post-racial president.

In the first exchange (Thursday), O'Reilly does some excellent work by stepping back and letting Ballantine and Williams debate the point. Sure enough, Ballantine hangs himself with his last comment which comes out of the mouth of the defeated. Williams cornered Ballantine who instinctively went for the uncle Tom reference by telling Williams to "go back to the porch".

CLICK HERE to watch what led to Juan's irritation.

So on Friday, Juan Williams fills in for O'Reilly and it's obvious rather quickly that Ballantine's comments have stewed in Juan's pot a bit. Williams is visibly agitated. One of his guests is Ken Hutcherson, a former NFL player and friend of Rush Limbaugh, who lets Williams know that he's "been there, done that". Sensing Williams' anger, Hutcherson takes that ball and runs with it.

As Bruce Willis said in Die Hard, "Welcome to the party, Pal", Hutherson does the same thing with Williams.

The good news?

Ballantine may have hacked off the Juan Williams Hornets' nest.



h/t to HOTAIR PUNDIT