RSS
SUPER BOWL
Showing posts with label Tea Party Patriots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tea Party Patriots. Show all posts

The bad apple's dirty laundry, thoroughly and publicly washed . . .

It occurred to me that before I took a look at reaction to Ron Schiller's now-infamous lunch conversation, I should first report what the man said.  This was lifted from npr.org's constantly updated blog, two-way, which covers breaking news.:

Ron Schiller, at THE lunch
NPR's soon-to-be-departing senior vice president for fundraising Ron Schiller is seen and heard on a videotape released this morning telling two men who were posing as members of a fictitious Muslim Education Action Center Trust that: 
— "The Tea Party is fanatically involved in people's personal lives and very fundamental Christian 
— I wouldn't even call it Christian. It's this weird evangelical kind of move." 
— "Tea Party people" aren't "just Islamaphobic, but really xenophobic, I mean basically they are, they believe in sort of white, middle-America gun-toting. I mean, it's scary. They're seriously racist, racist people." 
— "I think what we all believe is if we don't have Muslim voices in our schools, on the air ... it's the same thing we faced as a nation when we didn't have female voices." In the heavily edited tape, that comment followed Schiller being told by one of the men that their organization "was originally founded by a few members of the Muslim Brotherhood in America." There's no sign in the edited tape that Schiller reacted in any way after being told of the group's alleged connection to an Islamic group that appeared to be connected with Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood. 
— That NPR "would be better off in the long run without federal funding," a position in direct conflict with the organization's official position. 
Schiller is also heard laughing when one of the men jokes that NPR should be known as "National Palestinian Radio."
There was also a David Folkenflik story last night on  All Things Considered, and Larry Abramson reports about it today on Morning Edition. NPR has pledged to cover continue following  developments.

Early last evening, Slate reported:
NPR has released more statements. First, Schiller walks the plank and says he resigned.
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
Next, NPR CEO Vivian Schiller -- no relation -- tries to wrap a bow around this.
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 every day.
So here are a sprinkling of conservative reactions to the "Mr. Schilller Does Lunch" video  . . .

Cybercast News Service (CSN, founded as Conservative News Service) reports this reaction from Brent Bozell, founder and president of the Media Research Center, a conservative media watchdog group:
Leo Brent Bozell III
“NPR hates Middle America, plain and simple,” said Bozell in his statement.  “This week’s utterances from NPR officials underline that these taxpayer-funded bureaucrats loathe most of the taxpayers who feather their comfortable nest. Their contempt for ‘scary’ Middle Americans belies their ridiculous claims of concern for rural stations and their absurd declaration that somehow NPR is the epitome of fairness and balance.”
No wonder the radical left-wing billionaire George Soros has funneled $1.8 million into NPR,” said Bozell.  “They are doing his bidding and calling it ‘news.’”
Rush Limbaugh played the tape of Mr. Shiller's lunch conversation live on his radio program yesterday, sprinkling in such comments as
Rush Limbaugh
"... this guy Schiller is not a leader of anything.  He's a coward.  He's an effeminate little waif sitting up there waxing eloquent about how woe is the country because not everybody is as smart as he is -- while he's being duped! He's in the middle of being duped here by a couple of people who have set him up royally. ..." 
"...That is what's gonna come back and bite his tiny little geisha ah -- uh, butt.  We'd be better off without federal funding.  Ha! Now, he's out there admitting it, but his excuse will be, "Well, look, I'm trying to separate $5 million from these guys."  Of course I'm gonna tell 'em -- but this, behind closed doors, this is what's gonna gnaw at this guy's geisha butt, I guarantee you.  You're listening here to the intellectual Ron Schiller. ..."
Fox News reported that:
Jenny Beth Martin
The Tea Party Patriots slammed NPR for the Schiller comments Tuesday, calling on Congress to de-fund the radio network in light of the remarks.  
"Mr. Schiller's latest comments provoke a larger question -- how long will we as a nation be willing to tolerate the arrogance of the self-appointed ruling elite?" Tea Party Patriots coordinator Jenny Beth Martin said in a statement. 
Talking Points Memo, TPM, ("commentary on political events from a politically left perspective, by Joshua Micah Marshall") reported in its story,  "Tea Party Patriots Rally Against NPR," that:

In addition to his comments on the Tea Party, Schiller is shown in the video saying that NPR does not need federal funding, which the Patriots argue demonstrates that House Republican efforts to cut the news organization's funds are on the mark.
"Mr. Schiller himself candidly admits in the video that NPR doesn't need federal funding, and welcomes the opportunity to slant their reporting without the oversight of the taxpayer," Mark Meckler, national coordinator for Tea Party Patriots wrote in an e-mail to supporters today. "At a time when the country is upside down by more than a trillion dollars, can we really afford to provide huge subsidies to entities that openly state that they don't need the money? Let's take his advice and pass legislation that would defund the clearly biased news organization that is out of touch with Americans across the country."


The House, as I'm sure you're aware, recently passed a bill* that would defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which is a major source of funding for NPR affiliates such as WMRA. Without its network of affiliates broadcasting its programs, NPR would struggle to survive.

However, after googling "reaction Ron Shilller NPR," I was surprised to find that while the story of Mr. Schiller's lunch was everywhere, reaction to it was mostly confined to those who, like Mr. Limbaugh, react for a living.

To me this means that those who would defund NPR are contented to sit quietly and let NPR make their case for them. Right  now, NPR's current worst enemy appears to be its own management.

The public's reaction to the straight reporting of Mr. Schiller's lunch makes a pretty good case for this view of the situation.

This was posted by imkingdad on CNS:

If you've seen the video there is no way one can justify another dime of Taxpayer Money to these Left-wing criminals at PBS & NPR. 
About as Anti-American a bunch of folks as you'll ever find outside of a CPUSA meeting.

And this came from New York Times reader TomFl,
"I like NPR.  
After the Williams /Fox incident, how could an NPR executive be so dumb?  
Unbelievable. Another self inflicted wound." 
Your thoughts?

*link leads to an article posted this morning in The Atlantic on the same subject as this blog. 

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Uninsured but free?

Today's title is taken from a sign at a Tea Party Patriot rally. Repealing "Obamacare" has been an omnipresent talking point for Tea Party politicians. The latest cacophonous political iteration of this fight ended yesterday.

To review the Congressional opera that has just had its curtain rung down . . .

Tea Party Tax Day in St. Paul, MN. The group protested taxes and called for repeal of the new health care law.
The Tea Party Patriots website asked us to ...
Join your fellow Tea Party Patriots as we begin the next phase in our action plan to fight Government Take over of our Health Care. We are making calls to melt Congress' Phone Lines this week, planning Tea Party Patriots Health Care Freedom Town Halls, and walking our neighborhoods to engage our neighbors in this fight. . . .
. . . We need you to help us prevent politicans (sic) from taking over our health care. It is imperative that you make phone calls and melt the phone lines this week and next week. Time is of the essence and the time to act is now. Let's work together to affect (sic) meaningful change in America and prevent the government from taking over another aspect of our lives. The government take over of our health care is not a done deal yet. Now is the time to act and to a7ct (sic) decisvely (sic). We must weigh in actively, aggressively, and with big numbers.
The Wall Street Journal ran an OpEd  by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Joseph Antos, and James C. Capretta, stating that the health care repeal will not add to the federal deficit. 


The Congressional Budget Office says that it will.


The stated purpose of Senator Mitch McConnell's unsuccessful effort to undo healthcare reform was "To repeal the job-killing health care law and health care-related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010."


FactCheck.org essentially says the Senator's job-killing claim is hooey.


I think the one inarguable truth of the health care reform debate is: Whether it's a good idea for the government to be involved in health care isn't clear to that oft-cited entity, the American people. 






To mark the end of this round of  Congressional debate on repealing health care, I took a look at what the new Tea Party Patriots-backed members of Congress are doing about their own health insurance. FactCheck.org says the U.S. government offers a range of insurance plans to all its employees:
Members of Congress have good health insurance by any standard, but it’s not free and not reserved only for them – and it’s not government insurance. House and Senate members are allowed to purchase private health insurance offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which covers more than 8 million other federal employees, retirees and their families.
It’s not a "single-payer" system where the government acts as the one and only health insurance company. As President Bush’s chief of personnel Kay Coles James said in 2003, while lecturing at the conservative Heritage Foundation, "the FEHB program is not centralized, government-run health care." It has drawn praise both from conservatives and liberals, including President Obama, who held it up as a model for his own health care proposals. . . .
Like other large employers, the government pays a large share of the cost of coverage. On average, the government pays 72 percent of the premiums for its workers, up to a maximum of 75 percent depending on the policy chosen. For example, the popular Blue Cross and Blue Shield standard fee-for-service family plan carries a total premium of $1,120.47 per month, of which the beneficiary pays $356.59. Washington, D.C.-based employees who prefer an HMO option might choose the Kaiser standard family plan. It carries a total premium of $629.46 per month, of which the employee pays only $157.36. 
Nice insurance, if you can get it, right?  The kind we'd all like to have.

But still, if you got elected opposing "government-run" health insurance, should you snap up government-offered insurance?

Fourteen of the 85 first-year Republican lawmakers said no and declined federal health insurance. Among them was Richard Nugent of Florida.
"It has to do with just fundamental fairness," Nugent told ABC News. "This is an elected office. I just feel it shouldn't be like a career and I shouldn't be able to able to enrich myself through that, so it was just a personal choice. It had nothing to do with Obamacare."
Seventy-one first-year Republican lawmakers opted to sign up for federal health insurance, among them Missouri Republican Vicky Harzler.
Tea party favorite Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler (R-Harrisonville) will use her government health insurance plan, PoliticMo has learned from a Hartzler spokesman.
All Republicans in the Missouri delegation to Washington have spoken adamantly against the Affordable Care Act passed by congress last year, which includes creation of pool of providers, just like the pool federal employees including members of Congress chose from. The law also includes protections for individuals with pre-existing conditions, something the repeal would do away with for Ameicans not employed by the federal government.
Hartzler spokesman Steve Walsh emails, “The issue was and always has been government-RUN health care … not government providing PRIVATE insurance to its employees.”
So what's a poor American citizen to make of all this? You got any ideas?

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

My weekend with the Constitution and other historical documents . . .

Last week I had lunch with a young man who is deeply involved with the Tea Party Patriots. He was smart, well-stocked with information, had done a lot of thinking about important political issues, and was passionate about this country; in short, except for the issues he  focused on and the conclusions he drew, he could have been me at the same age --- back when I was deeply involved in the politics swirling around the Vietnam War.

This experience reinforced my belief that underneath our current American discord  is a shared love of America (which is not to be confused with approval of everything our government has done or is doing). And also, a shared love and respect for the U.S. Constitution, a document to which I frequently refer, but, until this past weekend, hadn't read in 30 years. Whether we agree with everything it says and sets up, that document is our American system of government.

If the Tea Party Patriots have done nothing else for me, they've made me realize it's time for each of us who engage in political discourse not just to think we know what we're talking about when we talk about the Constitution, but to know we know what we're talking about. After all, when it comes to arguing about what the Constitutions means, it's hardly legitimate to say that those who disagree with us haven't studied it, when we're not really all that familiar with it either.

Now please, don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying we have to become Constitutional scholars to be responsible citizens; we just have to read the document every decade or so. And think about it. And, perhaps, take a stroll through James Madison's head, its "Father," by reading some of his writings and some of  his friends' writings. And since we live close by, perhaps we could take a day and travel to Montpelier, James and Dolley Madison's newly restored home, and stand in the second floor study where Mr. Madison wrote much of our Constitution, and beam ourselves back to those equally partisan days.

That America was not this America, of course; its issues were very different. But I would argue its passions were not all that dissimilar from ours; just as I'd argue my passions are, perhaps, not all that dissimilar from my young Tea Party Patriot friend. Underneath all the anger and fear and yelling that fills our fractured discourse, both then and now, I would cautiously submit, we share a deep love of our country and worry about its future.





I do love my job. It got me invited to Montpelier's Center for the Constitution for the weekend, to attend a new seminar they're offering to re-introduce the general public to the U.S. constitution. It is a perfect situation in which to reconnect with Mr. Madison and his friends; both their world and their work.

I learned some, thought and read a lot. And plan to blog about it over the next couple of days.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...