Republican Wave

Some Democrats/Leftists are having a little trouble accepting what happened on Tuesday.

There was no Republican wave.

"Wave? What wave?" -Juan Williams pic.twitter.com/GCmYYc6vGS
— Wes (@FTWes) November 5, 2014

Yeah, no, Juan.

It was a BIG Republican wave.

Juan says it’s anti-incumbent night. Krauthammer, It's an amazing coincidence that all incumbents who are being knocked off are Dems. LOLOL

— David Limbaugh (@DavidLimbaugh) November 5, 2014

Juan Williams: Opposition to Obama Racist

Juan Williams believes that opposition to Obama is rooted in racism.

Listen.

The fact that I oppose the overwhelming majority of Obama's positions has absolutely nothing to do with the color of his skin.

I oppose Obama's Leftist ideology, not his race.

James O'Keefe's NPR Investigation: Ron Schiller

Ron Schiller, NPR's Senior Vice President for Fundraising, wasn't ready for his close-up. Thanks to James O'Keefe's investigation, the ugly Leftist, bigoted underbelly of NPR was on display for all to see.

Schiller, thinking he was meeting with potential big donors, members of a Muslim Brotherhood front group, slams Republicans as "anti-intellectual" and not interested in funding "the pursuit of knowledge." Schiller calls Tea Party activists "racist" and "scary," "white, middle America, gun-toting." Meanwhile, he lauds liberals and their alleged superior intellect.

On the subject of Jewish influence in the media and NPR, Schiller says that a pro-Israel agenda is there, especially in the newspapers owned by Jews. He claims that bias doesn't exist at NPR.

Schiller goes on to declare that he's very proud of the way NPR handled the firing of Juan Williams, suggesting that Williams is racist, bigoted, and compromised as a journalist. He broke his basic ethics as a journalist and has no credibility.

NPR is busted.

Here's video:



See the two-hour raw video, complete and unedited, here.

From the New York Times:

NPR was jolted Tuesday by the release of a videotape that showed one of the organization’s fund-raising executives repeatedly criticizing Republicans and Tea Party supporters.

The executive, Ronald Schiller, was recorded secretly by the Republican filmmaker and mischief-maker James O’Keefe. On the videotape, Mr. Schiller tells people posing as Muslim philanthropists that the Republican party has been “hijacked” by the Tea Party and that Tea Party supporters are “seriously racist, racist people.” Mr. Schiller indicates that he is sharing his personal point of view, not NPR’s.

Dana Davis Rehm, a spokeswoman for NPR, said in a statement Tuesday, “We are appalled by the comments made by Ron Schiller in the video, which are contrary to what NPR stands for.”

James O'Keefe is not a "mischief-maker."

He's a citizen journalist and a whistleblower.

Leftists love whistleblowers. They're heroes.

Naturally, the Times doesn't consider O'Keefe to be a hero. Whistleblower O'Keefe is the enemy, exposing the truth about NPR, a liberal outlet pushing a liberal agenda and strongly biased against the Right and the Tea Party.

The Leftists embrace Ian "F--- the Troops" Murphy for his prank call to Governor Scott Walker. Why don't they embrace O'Keefe?

Of course, Gov. Walker didn't say anything inappropriate as Schiller did, but the double standard employed by the Leftists is clear.

Notice how the Times rips O'Keefe's "stunt."

Mr. Schiller was essentially set up by Mr. O’Keefe, who has become well-known for such stunts. The people he is heard talking to on the videotape are posing as members of the Muslim Education Action Center Trust, a fictional group. They falsely claim that they want to donate up to $5 million to public media.

NPR said in the statement that the fake group members “repeatedly pressed us to accept a $5 million check, with no strings attached, which we repeatedly refused to accept.”

Mr. Schiller and another NPR executive, Betsy Liley, met the fake group members for lunch at Cafe Milano, a staple of the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington. A video camera was placed near the group’s table. Early on in the conversation, Mr. Schiller says, “Now I’ll talk personally as opposed to wearing my NPR hat.” Later, he adds caveats like “in my personal opinion.”

At one point, one of the fake group members jokes, “I like it when you take your NPR hat off.”

The fake group members bring up topics in an apparent effort to keep Mr. Schiller talking. For example, they tell him that their group was founded “by a few members of the Muslim Brotherhood in America” and that it donates money to Muslim schools.

Mr. Schiller answers, “I think what we all believe is if we don’t have Muslim voices in our schools, on the air, I mean, it’s the same thing we faced as a nation when we didn’t have female voices.”

Conservative blogs noted that a Web site set up for the fake Muslim group says it wants to “spread acceptance of Sharia across the world.” The Time magazine columnist James Poniewozik wrote Tuesday that “the prank — which uses ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ more often in screen titles than in the actual conversation — seems premised on the idea that meeting with a Muslim group and being in favor of including Muslim perspectives is inherently wrong,”

At another point in the secretly recorded lunch, Mr. Schiller criticizes what he calls an “anti-intellectual move on the part of a significant part of the Republican party.” He says that the pursuit of knowledge is “traditionally something that Democrats have funded and Republicans have not funded.”

Some Republicans in the House of Representatives have targeted NPR in recent weeks.

The Times does its best to defend Schiller and trash the "fake group members," using that term four times in four consecutive paragraphs.

It was a losing effort. The remarks on the video were so damning that there was no way to avoid addressing the embarrassment.

Still, the statements coming from NPR in response to the video are laughable.

We all know what NPR stands for, basically exactly what Schiller said on the video.

For NPR to pretend otherwise is pathetic.

Because of yesterday's revelations, Schiller is history immediately at NPR.

From Slate:

NPR Cans Ronald Schiller

That, from the new statement from NPR's Dana Rehm, is the shoe that took all day to drop. The entire statement, which also clarifies that Schiller decided to leave before the sting occurred:

The comments contained in the video released today are contrary to everything we stand for, and we completely disavow the views expressed. NPR is fair and open minded about the people we cover. Our reporting reflects those values every single day – in the civility of our programming, the range of opinions we reflect and the diversity of stories we tell.

The assertion that NPR and public radio stations would be better off without federal funding does not reflect reality. The elimination of federal funding would significantly damage public broadcasting as a whole.

Prior to the lunch meeting presented in the edited video, Ron Schiller had informed NPR that he was resigning from his position to take a new job. His resignation was announced publicly last week, and he was expected to depart in May. While we review this situation, he has been placed on administrative leave.

Here's Schiller's statement:

While the meeting I participated in turned out to be a ruse, I made statements during the course of the meeting that are counter to NPR’s values and also not reflective of my own beliefs. I offer my sincere apology to those I offended. I resigned from NPR, previously effective May 6th, to accept another job. In an effort to put this unfortunate matter behind us, NPR and I have agreed that my resignation is effective today.

Schiller's statement is just plain goofy.

He says his remarks during the meeting don't reflect his own beliefs.

Really? Whose beliefs do they reflect?

Of course, they're Schiller's beliefs. Was he lying to the potential donors?

NPR was forced to terminate Schiller immediately, as if that restores balance and integrity to the operation.

It doesn't. For every "Schiller" moment caught on video, you know there's an army of others like him at NPR.

NPR's CEO Vivian Schiller (no relation) released a statement that hangs Ron Schiller out to dry.

Ron Schiller’s remarks are contrary to what NPR stands for and deeply distressing to reporters, editors and others who bring fairness, civility and respect for a wide variety of viewpoints to their work everyday.

Yeah, right.

We know what NPR is about.

The good thing about O'Keefe's video is that NPR was forced to address reality - its lack of fairness, civility, and respect for viewpoints that stray from the liberal line.

The statements from NPR in response to O'Keefe's investigation are silly. Schiller didn't behave in a manner contrary to NPR's values.

The fact is Ron Schiller was a perfect spokesman for NPR.
__________________

James O'Keefe says he investigated NPR because of the Juan Williams incident.

Video: Juan Williams reacts to O'Keefe's investigation.
__________________

UPDATE: NPR chief executive quits over hidden camera video

NPR president and CEO Vivian Schiller resigned Wednesday under pressure from the news organization's board, a day after an undercover video showed one of her executives on a hidden camera calling the tea party racist and saying NPR would be better off without federal funding.

The shakeup comes at a critical time. Conservative politicians are again pressing to end congressional funding for NPR, money the organization said it needs to keep operating public radio and television stations in some of the nation's smallest communities.

Vivian Schiller told The Associated Press that the comments were outrageous and unfortunate.

"I did not want to leave NPR. There's a lot of pressure on NPR right now," Schiller told AP. "It would have made it too difficult for stations to face that funding threat in Congress without this change."

Poor Vivian. She's a victim.
_________________

UPDATE, March 10, 2011: New Video From Project Veritas: NPR Planned to Accept Donation from Muslim Brotherhood Front Group and Hide Origins From Government

Charles Krauthammer, Nina Totenberg, and Juan Williams

On Inside Washington, PBS, Charles Krauthammer challenged NPR's Nina Totenberg on the hypocrisy of Juan Williams being fired while she is allowed to be as opinionated and as ugly as she wants to be with impunity.

Video.


Transcript, from NewsBusters:

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: NPR then came up with a second explanation, the CEO said, “well he went over the line of NPR analysts and correspondents expressing opinions.” Well, I’m on the set with Juan at least once a week. I’ve been on the set with Nina here for almost 17 years-

NINA TOTENBERG: And Mara [Liasson] on Fox.

KRAUTHAMMER: Well, on this set with you. And I don't understand the inconsistency here. Why is it okay for Nina to express opinions, as she has tartly, sharply, unashamedly and openly, and she’s an honored correspondent there? In fact, they mention your status here on this show in your biography at NPR. And Juan, because he expresses his opinions, gets canned from NPR. That’s what the CEO said yesterday. In fact, the standard ought to be lower in the case of Juan because he’s an analyst, whereas Nina is a correspondent.

NINA TOTENBERG: In the modern journalistic world, where people are asked to give opinions all the time, whether you’re a regular on a show like this or not, if you cover a story you may be asked to appear on a television show and talk about it. I think it’s a very, very difficult line to draw. And NPR tries to draw it, in my view, using rules that don’t exist anymore.

KRAUTHAMMER: But what’s the difference between you and Juan expressing opinions? You on this show, and him on Fox? It’s completely illogical and hypocritical.

COLBY KING, WASHINGTON POST: In Nina's behalf, that’s not a question that she should be made to answer-

KRAUTHAMMER: She works for NPR, perhaps she can explain it.

JEANNE CUMMINGS, POLITICO: But I think what this episode does demonstrate, or some of that, the changing nature of journalism. There are a lot of blurred lines and everyone of us has to bear in mind what responsibilities and what role-

KRAUTHAMMER: But where did Juan go over the line?

CUMMINGS: -we want to take in our profession. So it is risky when you get pulled on TV. Sometimes you get asked, if you’re a reporter, you sometimes get asked a question that you don't really feel comfortable answering in your capacity as a reporter.

KRAUTHAMMER: This is all highfalutin journalistic theory. Where did Juan go over the line? I’m defending him. He’s a friend of mine, he’s an innocent, he got fired.

KING: He’s been a friend of mine for twenty years-

KRAUTHAMMER: Where did he go wrong?

KING: As I said, it was not a firing offense.

This is great.

Krauthammer directly confronts Totenberg about NPR giving her free rein to spew her opinions and say terribly offensive things while Juan Williams gets canned.

Why is it okay for Nina to express opinions, as she has tartly, sharply, unashamedly and openly, and she’s an honored correspondent there?

Clearly, it's not OK. It's not OK at all.

Krauthammer is right. It's "completely illogical and hypocritical."

That's the Left in a nutshell, completely illogical and hypocritical.

Juan Williams: I was Fired for Telling the Truth

Juan Williams writes about NPR firing him. He tells what happened internally at NPR. He defends himself, insisting that he's not a bigot.

He declares, "Yesterday NPR fired me for telling the truth."

The dictatorial NPR comes off as anything but a champion of free speech and free thought.

It's an extremely enlightening piece about NPR and thought control on the Left.

Based on these revelations, I am convinced that NPR should not receive tax dollars.

Read more.

Vivian Schiller: Juan Williams and Psychiatrist

The CEO of NPR, Vivian Schiller, believes that Juan Williams is in need of psychiatric care.

Fired NPR news analyst Juan Williams should have kept his feeling about Muslims between himself and "his psychiatrist or his publicist," the network's CEO told an audience at the Atlanta Press Club earlier today.

Yikes!

Schiller seems more than a bit unbalanced.

NPR Internal Memo on Juan Williams

Greta Van Susteren has NPR's internal memo on the firing of Juan Williams:

To: AREPS

Subject: [areps] Juan Williams

Dear AREPS,

Thank you for all of your varying feedback on the Juan Williams situation. Let me offer some further clarification about why we terminated his contract early.

First, a critical distinction has been lost in this debate. NPR News analysts have a distinctive role and set of responsibilities. This is a very different role than that of a commentator or columnist. 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. As you all well know, we offer views of all kinds on your air every day, but those views are expressed by those we interview – not our reporters and analysts.

Second, this isn’t the first time we have had serious concerns about some of Juan’s public comments. Despite many conversations and warnings over the years, Juan has continued to violate this principal.

Third, these specific comments (and others made in the past), are inconsistent with NPR’s ethics code, which applies to all journalists (including contracted analysts):

“In appearing on TV or other media . . . NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist. They should not participate in shows . . . that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis.”

More fundamentally, “In appearing on TV or other media including electronic Web-based forums, NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist.”

Unfortunately, Juan’s comments on Fox violated our standards as well as our values and offended many in doing so.

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.

This was a tough decision and we appreciate your support.

Thanks,

Vivian

Vivian Schiller

President & CEO, NPR

Here's what won't get you fired by NPR. This doesn't violate its ethics code.

Nina Totenberg of NPR calls for God to give Jesse Helms and his grandchildren AIDS.

NINA TOTENBERG: I think [Jesse Helms] ought to be worried about the, about what's going on in the good Lord's mind because if there's retributive justice, he'll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.

What a vile thing to say!

But no problem!

It's outrageous that our tax dollars are used to fund this stuff.

Get NPR out of the public trough.

Juan Williams: Fired by NPR

UPDATE: JUAN WILLIAMS: I Was Fired for Telling the Truth
___________________

UPDATE: NPR's internal memo on the firing of Juan Williams.
___________________

NPR has been waiting for some reason, any reason, to get rid of Juan Williams, NPR senior news analyst and FOX News political analyst.

NPR and its audience weren't happy with what Williams would say on FOX.

On Wednesday night, NPR fired him. I guess the Leftists just couldn't tolerate Williams participating on FOX programs.

From the New York Times:

NPR has terminated its contract with Juan Williams, one of its senior news analysts, after he made comments about Muslims on the Fox News Channel.

NPR said in a statement that it gave Mr. Williams notice of his termination on Wednesday night.

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.”

Mr. Williams also made reference to the Pakistani immigrant who pleaded guilty this month to trying to plant a car bomb in Times Square. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,” Mr. Williams said.

NPR said in its statement that the remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”

...Mr. Williams’s contributions on Fox raised eyebrows at NPR in the past. In February 2009, NPR said it had asked that he stop being identified on “The O’Reilly Factor” as a “senior correspondent for NPR,” even though that title was accurate.

Alicia C. Shepard, the NPR ombudswoman, said at the time that Mr. Williams was a “lightning rod” for the public radio organization in part because he “tends to speak one way on NPR and another on Fox.”

Ms. Shepard said she had received 378 listener e-mails in 2008 listing complaints and frustrations about Mr. Williams.

What thugs!

These thuggish NPR listeners and staff aren't open-minded. They oppose freedom of thought and speech. They oppose Williams' willingness to go over to the dark side, FOX News.

Here's the video of Williams' remarks that prompted NPR to give him the ax:



Williams committed a mortal sin. He agreed with Bill O'Reilly. He spoke candidly.

Transcript

BILL O'REILLY: So where am I going wrong there, Juan?

JUAN WILLIAMS: Well, actually, I hate to say this to you because I don't want to get your ego going, but I think you're right. I think, look, political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don't address reality.

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 a 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.

Now, I remember also that when the Times Square bomber was in court, I think this was just last week, he said the war with Muslims, America's war, is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts. But I think there are people who want to somehow remind us all, as President Bush did after 9/11, it's not a war against Islam. President Bush went to a mosque...

O'REILLY: Well, there isn't any theology involved in this at all from my perspective, Juan. But you live in the liberal precincts. You actually work for NPR, OK?

WILLIAMS: Yes....

Williams doesn't work for NPR anymore.

Clearly, Williams is a victim of the Left's intolerance.

Although the liberal media have spent the last 48 hours slamming Christine O'Donnell about her knowledge of the First Amendment, I think what's more newsworthy is that the thugs at NPR, an operation that receives taxpayer funding, don't practice the freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights.

What did Williams say that's "inconsistent with [NPR's] editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR"?

What did he say? He candidly admitted his concern about terrorism when he's on a plane.

Moreover, Williams is right about identifying the terrorists at war with the United States as Muslims. That may be politically incorrect, but it's reality.

Williams goes on to say that we are not at war with Islam.

I fail to see the problem. What was so objectionable about what Williams said? He was honest about his fears. That's legitimate.

It's perfectly understandable to be nervous if some passengers are identifying themselves as Muslims with the seeming purpose of intimidating others onboard a plane. When confronted with such suspicious behavior, it would be abnormal not to be fearful.

The reality is that there are millions of radical Muslims currently at war with the United States. To be sure, they are extremists, but they do identify themselves as Muslims.

What are NPR's editorial standards and practices anyway?

Is it acceptable for NPR to call Tea Party patriots and Republicans racists? Is it OK to belittle them and question their intelligence?

Is it acceptable for NPR to mock Christians and degrade the Catholic Church?

Is it acceptable for NPR to reiterate Obama's talking points and promote his agenda?

Are those sort of remarks, common from the Left, consistent with NPR's lofty, sophisticated "editorial standards and practices"?

Give me a break!

The editorial standards and practices of NPR apparently are extremely rigid. Liberal or else. Only certain groups are acceptable to target.

Williams didn't go on an Islamophobic rant. Yes, he admits to profiling in his mind and expresses his subsequent anxiety. I think his point is that even someone unbigoted, like himself, can experience nervousness. It may be irrational, but it is how he reacts emotionally.

I think he has been victimized by his fellow liberals. They have zero tolerance. March in lockstep or you'll be thrown out with the trash.

And our tax dollars help to fund NPR.

Why are we subsidizing an anti-conservative operation with an unabashedly liberal agenda? Do we really need to have government funded media?

It's time for that money to be cut off. If we're going to subsidize NPR then we should also subsidize FOX News.

Juan Williams: Tea Party, Timothy McVeigh, 'Don't Tread on Me'

Hey! Juan Williams!

DON'T TREAD ON ME!



From Matthew Balan, the Media Research Center:

On Monday's O'Reilly Factor on Fox News, NPR news analyst Juan Williams furthered the left's talking point about the tea party's supposed connection to militias, and even went so far to claim that the Gadsden or "Don't Tread on Me" flags used by the conservative grassroots movement is "the same imagery that was on Timothy McVeigh."

Williams made this preposterous claim during a panel discussion with the Weekly Standard's Mary Katharine Ham 25 minutes into the 8 pm Eastern hour. O'Reilly asked the NPR analyst about a point made by Fox News's Brit Hume in an earlier segment, that there's double-standard in the mainstream media in the amount of coverage of extremist imagery and language found at tea party rallies has been given versus equivalent imagery and language used at left-wing protests: "There's no doubt that the media will seize upon any kind of misbehavior on the right...Whereas if it happens on the left, it will, as Mary Katharine [Ham] said, be de-emphasized or ignored entirely. So that's a corrupt media system, isn't it?"

The guest raised the militia issue at the end of his answer:

WILLIAMS: I think we're out of context here. If we're talking about- you know, somebody going after Ronald Reagan- you know, one guy who's in love with Jody Foster, okay- if we're talking about that. You know, people who have a lot of hatred- hateful attitudes towards President Bush, and then somebody who is extremist on the fringe, yes. And if that was also to be then the case with the tea party, yes, that's too much and unfair. But, when you start to see militia groups start to associate with the tea party, when you see the flag-

O'Reilly then interjected and replied, "Whoa, whoa, whoa! Let me stop you there. I haven't seen militia groups associating with the tea party." Williams continued with his bizarre flag point:

WILLIAMS: Oh, let me tell you something, the flag- the tea party flag is now- you know, for example, they use the same kind of imagery-

O'REILLY: The 'Don't Tread on Me' flag?

WILLIAMS: Yeah, the one with the snake- that's the same imagery-

O'REILLY: Well, that's from the Revolutionary War.

WILLIAMS: No, no, no. But it's taken away- it's taken away- obviously, it's not the same flag. It's not the flag that you see flying up in the New England states. It's a separate flag- it's a new flag that they have created. But it's the same imagery that was on Timothy McVeigh, you know? I mean, this is the kind of thing that's worrisome to me. I don't see how you can get away from it.

O'REILLY: Oh, come on, Juan. You are smarter than that. You can't possibly think the tea party is taking any cue from Timothy McVeigh. That's suicide.

Balan goes on to give Willliams a history lesson of the three "Don't Tread on Me" flags dating back to the American Revolutionary War. He provides instances of the use of the Gadsen Flag (seen above), including by our military following 9/11.

[T]wo branches of the U.S. military have used the "Don't Tread on Me" flags. The First Naval Jack has been flown on all U.S. naval vessels since the first anniversary of 9/11 in 2002. Marines flew the Gadsden Flag in over Kandahar, Afghanistan's airport shortly after its capture in 2001, and more recently in Helmand Province. But according to Juan Williams ludicrous reasoning, they must have been inspired by the Oklahoma City bomber.

Balan also notes that Nike uses "Don't Tread on Me" and the image of the coiled snake to promote the U.S. Soccer Team. Watch Nike's video here.

For a long time I had the Gadsen Flag on the sidebar of this blog. I used the image as a button linking to a post on the White House blog, "Facts are Stubborn Things." I used the red and white striped "Don't Tread on Me" flag in a 2006 post about the Muslim world protesting our liberties and those of the Western World, specifically free speech. In other posts, I've written "Don't Tread on Me" to exemplify how I cherish my rights as an American.

I used "Don't Tread on Me" years before there was a Tea Party movement and Barack Obama was in the White House.

I had no idea that utilizing historic American flags was a sign of association with fringe, violent militia groups. I certainly didn't use the flags as an endorsement of Timothy McVeigh or any anti-government organization. I abhor the use of violence.

I'm absolutely certain that the U.S. military didn't use the flag to signal its support for McVeigh. Nike isn't branding the U.S. Soccer Team as Timothy McVeigh wannabes.

Good grief. What is Williams thinking?

Now it's off limits to display a flag that symbolizes our freedoms as Americans, the founding of our nation, and the Revolutionary spirit?

Because Tea Party protesters display the flag, that's a sign of their solidarity with militia groups?

That is so offensive.

It degrades the patriots that created the United States and the patriots of today.

This incessant smearing of the Tea Partiers really has reached unacceptable levels.

It wasn't enough for the Left to call them part of an Astroturf movement. It wasn't enough to label them as racists and bigots of assorted varieties. Now, they're of the same mind as Timothy McVeigh. (You can tell by the flags.)

These assaults by Juan Williams and those of his ilk are totally out of line. It's wrong to belittle these Americans and use Saul Alinsky tactics in an attempt to stifle and destroy them.

DON'T TREAD ON ME!

DISCLAIMER: My use of the slogan "Don't Tread on Me" and the image of the Gadsen Flag is not an indication of my affiliation with anti-government militia groups nor is it a sign that I admire Timothy McVeigh.

I'll be sure to clarify from now on. I don't want to be mistaken for someone interested in the violent overthrow of the government. I'm not a Bill Ayers fan.

Video.

Wanda Sykes: Fox News and Racial Diversity

I forget that Wanda Sykes has a show on FOX on Saturday night.

If this is typical of the stuff she does, then I haven't been missing much.

Jeff Poor, NewsBusters, was watching The Wanda Sykes Show last night.

If what Poor describes is typical of the stuff Sykes does, then I haven't been missing much.

Poor writes:

On the Dec. 12 broadcast of "The Wanda Sykes Show," Sykes, made famous for her attacks on conservative talker Rush Limbaugh and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin at last May's White House Correspondents Dinner, took a shot at the Fox News Channel for her perception that it lacks black correspondents (emphasis added).

"So I've been digging around here and I found some old footage of black reporters on Fox News - you know, back when they were allowed to be on that network," Sykes said. "Fascinating stuff - take a look at this one."

But if Sykes were a regular viewer of the Fox News Channel, she would have realized there are black personalities featured regularly in the network's news reporting, including White House correspondent Wendell Goler, FoxNews.com "Strategy Room" anchor and Fox News Channel newscaster Harris Faulkner, Fox News religion correspondent Lauren Green and "Special Report" and "Fox News Sunday" regular Juan Williams.

Nonetheless, Sykes' comments were a lead-in for a seemingly sophomoric spoof from black newscaster meant to take place at the Hindenburg crash in 1937, making off-color analogies to provide a "Negro perspective."

Here's the transcript of the footage from "Negro International News."

Here's the video.



Not funny.

Sykes really comes off looking foolish when she states that the FOX News Channel lacks racial diversity.

The joke is on her.