NPR VP that said the Tea Party was full of racists and had to resign... was a Republican.

Let NPR survive without taxpayer money. Let them compete against the other news stations. Let them sell advertising to progressives and prop themselves up just like Air America tried to do and failed. Hold some fundraisers and support themselves. Why would you be for using taxpayer to support these people? Do you pay taxes?

Why would you be for using taxpayer to support these people?

So we don't have to see @!$%#ed up @!$%# like this pass for news.

http://www.joeydevilla.com/2009/07/28/fox-news-doesnt-know-where-iraq-is/

http://www.sott.net/articles/show/224893-UPDATED-Fox-Reverses-Poll-Results-To-Falsely-Claim-Most-Americans-Favor-Ending-Collective-Bargaining

http://mediamatters.org/research/201103100001

Having an unbiased source - which NPR is - for news is important.

Dont deflect the real issue here with links to biased media blogs. Let NPR sell advertising to stay afloat just like CNN, ABC, CBS, etc..and yes even FOX (**GASP) does.

I dont want my tax dollars going to support these people. Time for all the entitlements to stop. The free ride is over.

Dont deflect the real issue here with links to biased media blogs. Let NPR sell advertising to stay afloat just like CNN, ABC, CBS, etc..and yes even FOX (**GASP) does.

You're missing the point of NPR, then.

The regular news networks are beholden to their advertisers. It may or may not have an impact on their coverage, but the more sinister bent is that it makes ratings incredibly important. Without ratings, advertisers leave. Sensationalism creates ratings, so we get more "info-tainment" than straight news. NPR's entire purpose is to be a station that isn't part of the advertiser-supported news cycle, so it can focus on factual information instead of ratings grabs.

I dont want my tax dollars going to support these people.

Then you'll be relieved to hear that NPR receives no direct federal funding. Problem solved.

Though out of curiosity, exactly how many hours of NPR have you listened to in the past week? The past month? The past year?

NPR gets some funding from Corporation for Public Broadcasting...Not alot but some. That money comes from tax payers. Why should any money go to them at all? Let them sell advertising. Let them prop themselves up with private funding.

I do on occasion listen to NPR. Not a whole lot but every once in awhile. I find alot of there content to be a bit pretentious...At times informative. Cant say how much I listen to them but I will say at least once a week. Does that help?

NPR gets some funding from Corporation for Public Broadcasting...Not alot but some. That money comes from tax payers.

Yes, but that is government money going to a private corporation which is then given, at the discretion of that corporation, to NPR. Are you honestly arguing that the government should be able to tell the Corporation for Public Broadcasting who they do and don't give money to?

Why should any money go to them at all? Let them sell advertising.

Asked and answered, lemon. NPR exists for the expressed purpose of being a not-for-profit news organization. It's the only one of its kind, and it needs to continue being not-for-profit to maintain its entire reason for existence.

I find alot of there content to be a bit pretentious...At times informative. Cant say how much I listen to them but I will say at least once a week. Does that help?

A bit. Maybe you could outline the liberal bias you've heard during your time with the station.

Dont deflect the real issue here with links to biased media blogs.

I am not deflecting at all. The point of public broadcasting is to NOT allow private interests like News Corp twist, spin, outright lie and make @!$%# up.

The point of public broadcasting is that it truly is unbiased and free from influence. That is what we need. We don't need another news outlet that cannot @!$%#ing find a country on a map.

These days it seems that any news reporting that does not endorse and/or praise the GOP/Tea Party agenda in it's entirety is branded as being "liberal biased".

These days it seems that any news reporting that does not endorse and/or praise the GOP/Tea Party agenda in it's entirety is branded as being "liberal biased".

Are they hitting any balls to you out there in left field?

The point of public broadcasting is that it truly is unbiased and free from influence. That is what we need. We don't need another news outlet that cannot @!$%#ing find a country on a map.
unbiased huh?

Like the Juan Williams firing...nice try.

Must it be necessary to curse to make your point?

alleged media misconduct what will happen to Faux

Not a darn thing Becks- FOX executives have already testified in open court- under oath mind you- that that are not a news service but an entertainment venue and thus, cannot be held to any standard of media veracity. They will chug along as usual, puffing out odoriferous clouds of noxious platitudes and brain rotting talking points- same old, same old!

Let NPR stand or fall or their own, no more taxpayer money. I dont believe for a second that guy was a Republican, for one thing NPR would never hire a Republican, they fired Juan Williams because he wasnt left wing enought for them.

Like the Juan Williams firing...nice try.

Nope what you wrote was not even close to a nice try.

Seriously folks?

btco, you talk about unbiased sources and right above that list 3 very biased sources.

Are you all really trying to Pass off NPR as "Unbiased"?
Let's at least try to keep the BS to a minimum.

NPR employs Nina Totenberg as a Reporter, not a commentator.
You can look up quotes from her yourself.

"How to speak Teabagger", while funny, clearly isn't "unbiased".

The point of public broadcasting is to NOT allow private interests like News Corp twist, spin, outright lie and make @!$%# up.

Again, give it a rest.
We're all posting on MSNBC which we all know is in GE's pocket just like Fox is in NewsCorp's pocket.

The bottomline is that all of you are trying to obfuscate the issue, which is NPR, by talking about Fox (and now me bringing up MSNBC). Neither apply here.

Steve Watts
NPR exists for the expressed purpose of being a not-for-profit news organization. It's the only one of its kind, and it needs to continue being not-for-profit to maintain its entire reason for existence.

And while they may be "Non-profit" don't try to sweep this under the rug:

One of the ways NPR funds programming and general operations is through underwriting and sponsorship support from corporations, foundations, and associations.

So while they don't run commercials they do...

provide funders on-air recognition while stipulating that these credit announcements are strictly for identification- not promotion.

While anyone can donate to NPR, I find it interesting that George Soros donate 1.8 million in October. Just Google "NPR Donation" and that pops up right away.

George doesn't tend to donate to "right" or "center" organizations, which doesn't make NPR "biased by association" but does bring about reason to ponder...

NPR employs Nina Totenberg as a Reporter, not a commentator.

Biased reporter /= biased reports

Every reporter has some form of bias. It's an inescapable part of the human condition. But claiming that makes the organization itself biased, or the work they do, is just silly. That's why we have editors and proofreading. A good reporter removes themselves from the bias. There's actually an open thread right now asking for an example of liberal bias in an NPR report, and so far there hasn't been a single one named. Feel free to jump in if you can.

which doesn't make NPR "biased by association"...

... but it does make conservatives try very hard to imply bias by association before backpeddling and acknowledging that everything they just said is meaningless.

I'm a taxpayer and I want my tax money to go to NPR and Planned Parenthood.

You know, what I want from the media is basically strong journalistic standards. "Unbiased" does not mean that you can't have a point of view, it means that you are willing to present the views of others without judgement. Look at it this way - the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times are both class acts in how they present the news, yet one comes from the right end of the poitical spectrum and the other comes from the left.

To those defending Fox by just saying that they are a private sector outfit, I'd say that your statements miss the point, which is that Fox has very low journalistic standards. If they have a guest whose politics they disagree with, that individual can hardly get a word in without being pilloried or ridiculed.

You simply cannot realistically say the same about NPR or pubic radio in general. Conservative guests are given airtime without being subjected to aggressive cross-examination by the host. If you listen regularly you will not be able to deny that.

Also, to reinforce my 2.20 point, it should be emphasized that Mr Schiller repeatedly told the punks working for Mr O'Keefe that even if NPR did eventually take the $3 Million check, it would not cause any change whatsoever in news coverage. O'Keefe conveniently edited that part out.

So he says...Sounds like a guy trying to save face to me.

Right lemonray, he just recently manufactured his entire family and politically history simply to make the GOP look bad for his own faux pas- as not all opinions should be shared- I wonder if he used a time machine? Things that make you go: "Hummmm...?" Not!

You never with some guys. Some guys are closet Democrats too... :)

Ron Schiller was NOT the CEO of NPR. Vivian Schiller (no relation) was. She was forced to resign because of what Ron Schiller said. She did not make those comments. Your headline is misleading.

Doesn't really matter what political party this man follows or did follow or who he votes for.

Now does it?

The bottomline is that he said something embarrassing to the organization and "had to step down". It's the right call by NPR and it provides some consistency.

That is true middleman...

" If they withhold funding for NPR for alleged media misconduct what will happen to Faux ?"

Probably nothing, since FOX doesn't get federal funding.

For a dying party they sure kicked the crap out of the Dems in the last election.

It's funny how the LWN's consistently overlook the results of the mid-term election!

Why?

They live in the "Valley of Denial"!

If what he said was true, it was true no matter who he was.

But, since it's a caricature with no basis in fact?

President Obama who is the leader of the democratic party said that the democrats were shellacked in the 2010 elections. He correctly predicted the influence of corporate personhood money during his state of the union speech.

MSM and the president do not talk about how the tea baggers whipped (waxed and buffed)republican asses during the 2010 primaries. As a result, republicans had tea baggers brought into the republican party becase both groups knew that if the teabaggers ran as a third party they would cancel out each other guaranteeing wins by the democratic party.

The combined efforts of the teabaggers and the republicans, all funded by foreign and domestic money from the US Chamber of Commerce, shellacked the democrats.

The only shellacking results that I agree with are those that got rid of DINOs because those conservative chumps routinely voted with the nearly all conservative republican party which defeated the power of the democrats' super majority.

This argument that NPR is left wing is silly and inexcusable. The right wing nuts get their panties in a knot all the time over alleged left wing broadcasting and since it does not lean either right or left it ignores them. Npr exists because we the American people own the Airwaves and lease them out for payment to the public. Along with that a tiny segment of the airwaves is devoted to National public radio/tv. You yell left wing I say watch the McLaughlin report and tell me thats left wing. Where was the comservative movement Born? On NPR of course with William F Buckley's show. Down through my time here on earth I have found this broadcast unit to be very accurate and that would preclude them from ever broadcasting the tripe most right wingers like to listen to because the majority of it is just propaganda with no substance in fact thus they want to eliminate any broadcasting that tells the truth.....

Repub values, mostly votes Democratic.half a minute ago via web

Here is another deception.Where on the web. I could take a few minutes and find someone on the web that will tell you a cabbage is GOD but thats neither here nor there. If this man thinks (rightly) the Tparty is racist of course he would vote Democratic. I have old school republican friends who while remaining registered Republicans could never vote for these so called conservatives and vote regularly for Democrats.

It's no less believable than the "democrat plants" at the Tea Party rallies they were on about last summer, is it?

I don't know the "democrat plants" were so easy to spot. If we are to believe the title of this seed Schiller is just a freakin James Bond type dude.

The Breitebart effect continues in the GOP.

I could care less about where your loyalty is...and you can interject as much fantasy as you like (that's just deflecting from the facts) the fact is the Tea Party is loaded with racists and that's exactly why people like Mike Huckabee are saying the type of crap he's saying.

The numbers don't lie...Mike Huckabee is a racist and he's the darlin' of the Tea Party!

"53 percent of respondents who said they expect to vote in the GOP presidential primary identified themselves as Tea Party supporters. Their favorite candidate right now: the former Arkansas governor who shot to prominence after winning over conservatives in Iowa in 2008.

Among Tea Party backers, 27 percent said Gov. Mike Huckabee would be their first choice among Republican candidates, with an additional 15 percent calling Huckabee their second choice."

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/03/6180588-nbcwsj-poll-tea-party-supporters-like-huck

To get Obama out of the picture in January, 2013 -- I'd vote for Satan himself

Satan will tell you that kissing his a$$ will not win you any favors down here, so, if that's what you are attempting to do, forget it, looking forward too your arrival, that is unless fate intervenes.

I'd vote for Satan himself.

So you're gonna vote Republican, then?

TheyreAllCrooks:

50% of Republcans say that Obama is a Muslim or was born in some foreign land.

Care to post a source for that?
If not I calling that out as BS.

I would have said the following:

100% of Idiots say that Obama is a Muslim or was born in some foreign land.

and

100% of Idiots say that all Tea Party Members are Racists.

But of course, I'm logical, and don't feel the need to attack one side or the other because I am not a sheep or a lemming.

Plus, it's much more fun to grab some popcorn and watch as the Wingnuts attack each other.
And then follow that up by calling them out on their double standards.

I can post "multiple sources"...this has been in several news sources for many weeks now...apparently you don't watch news...


http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0810/Poll_46_of_GOP_thinks_Obamas_Muslim.html


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/30/obama-islamic-fundamentalist-gop-polled-majority-says_n_699883.html

I can post "multiple sources"...this has been in several news sources for many weeks now...apparently you don't watch news...

....apparently he dosen't watch fox.

During the 2008 presidential race a number of GOP strategists were all over TV saying that McCain should play "the Muslim card"...the closest he got was pointing at Obama and saying..."that one"...and then having Palin run around the country screaming..."domestic terrorist"..."un-American"..."pro-American"...from the "pro-American parts of the country" >>> translated... that means white people!

Back then it was around 10-15% of the GOP saying Obama was a Muslim...but thanks to FOX, Huckabee, Palin and the rest of those bible thumpin bigots that number is now 50%...

Excuse me for not stating things the way you would with your logic...I'm just stating the facts!

This notion that the Tea Party isn't loaded with racists is simply not true...the numbers speak for themselves.

Are you really trying to pass off that Politico story as any indicator of ANYTHING?
Come on, man use your head.

The Time GOP number isn't posted on the Web, as best I can tell, but a spokeswoman for the magazine shared the breakdown of the data at my request.

Sounds good so far?
Not really.

There are a couple of possible explanations for the Time poll finding that belief to be more prevalent, both in the public at large and the GOP.

So the poll found more of the "Public at Large" thought he was a Muslim in addition to the people that identified themselves as GOP supporters.
Pretty cloudly.

First, the Time survey was done Monday and Tuesday, at the height of the controversy over the mosque near ground zero in New York. Second, it used different wording from the Pew survey, which gave respondents a smorgasbord of choices for Obama's possible religion.

Not getting anymore clear.

Time had 1002 respondents, talked to 295 Republicans and reduced that number to 272 to reweight the poll.

So Time magazine which we all know leans left asked a Pointed question to 1000 people right after the Ground Zero issue.

If my math is right, that gives the Time poll a sampling error for the Republican group of +/- 5.8 percent.

Huffington, lol, references Newsweek which after cutting through all the other issues in the polls and getting to the main piece you are talking about here, which is toward the bottom strangely.

Gives us this description of the poll:

Methodology: This poll was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International on August 25 and 26, 2010. Telephone interviews were conducted with a nationally representative sample of 1,029 adults, 18 years and older, including 697 adults reached on a landline telephone and 332 adults reached on a cell phone. Results use a two-stage weighting procedure: (1) to account for number of adults in household and household phone-use patterns; and (2) to adjust the sample demographics to the U.S. Census's Current Population Survey parameters for gender, age, education, race, region, and population density. The overall margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points for results based on 1,029 adults. Results based on smaller subgroups are subject to larger margins of sampling error.

Sadly, wording of questions, and the demographic of your sample size, and timing of your poll, and the "Population Survey parameters" play a large role in poll results.

The biggest and most important facts I can glean from the Newsweek poll is that they were calling people on their Cellphones. Which makes me glad I'm on a "Do Not Call" list.

So basically your polls mean nothing and I'm sure some Righty could log in and post a link to some "right leaning" organization that ran a similar poll and got an opposite result.

But the fact remains It's the Tea Party, FOX & Republican Party leaders who are pushing this false notion that President Obama is a Muslim...we see it on TV practically everyday.

Back then it was around 10-15% of the GOP saying Obama was a Muslim...but thanks to FOX, Huckabee, Palin and the rest of those bible thumpin bigots that number is now 50%...

Sorry, I don't really know much about Huckabee, I don't watch him.
As far as Palin goes, I can't stand her.

Excuse me for not stating things the way you would with your logic...I'm just stating the facts!

No, you aren't stating facts, TheyreAllCrooks.

While I will gladly agree with you that "they are all crooks" you can't possibly be trying to pass off those pointed and skewed polls by Well known Biased and left leaning organizations and passing them off as facts.

You're basing your opinion of this whole country on a sample size of a thousand people?
Out of 1000 people ~120 "Republicans" thought the President was Muslim?

You have to do better than that.
Two polls?
2000 People.
Not to mention the Pew Poll in the first story says it's ~31% with a ~4% margin of error.

I'm gonna take you to task now...

Since you seem to know a lot about Fox, or obviously more than I do...
I want you to go to Fox and any other "right" leaning site and link us some similar polls to the ones you just linked.

It's a challenge.
With that information we'll reconcile all of the polls and see what we come up with.

http://iowaindependent.com/52121/iowa-focus-group-on-fox-news-obama-is-muslim#strong>>

Sorry, I don't really know much about Huckabee, I don't watch him.

..well if you don't know much about him how do you know I'm wrong?

My point all along (which you continue to ignore) is that it's the TP Leaders and The GOP leaders that are feeding this racist crap to their supporters!

Huckabee is the #1 candidate for POTUS among TPers (you wanna see a poll for that too?)...and he spent the past week spreading more racism than any KKK Grand Wizard ever has - or did you miss that too?

I know racism when I see it...and the tea party is full of it!

that's what I was thinkin :D

RINO-WINO,still a Republican!

RINO-WINO,still a Republican!

A rare breed of a republican to say the least, he's morals would not allow him to lie, also he has most likely held the opinion that palin, bachmann, newt, huck, beck, hannity, etc..are all idots but for whatever one's reasoning, was allowed to play with matches.

Sounds like a republican embarrassed by radical wingnuts within his party who had an honest moment with the pimp.

Actually, lib50...
Sounds like an a person who got caught making a stupid blanket statement and was asked to step down because he embarrassed his employer.

His political party?
Irrelevant.

The fact that he got caught lying on tape, making stupid statements and embarrasing NPR.
Relevant.

Lying on tape? Where is the lie?

If you are ksilvers59 and lie in an MSNBC forum about either Political Party retaliation will occur.
I'm calling you out on your lie and your stupidity for making a false blanket statement.

All the head of NPR at any level would have to do is air the many, many video tapes of the racist signs, chants and literature at the "tea party" events over the last 2 years.

Many, many?
If by less than 1% you mean many then sure.

There have been an equal number of Black Panthers and Nation of Islam Representatives and Democratic Rallies. So all Democrats are Racists as well.

See how stupid that looks?
Wait, unless you are a racist, keepfreepress?
Are you a Racist?
You are one because you voted for Democrats.

I guess I am too then because I voted for Democrats.
But at least I didn't vote for any Tea Party people right?

NPR is not just a liberal outlet, it is a public outlet and stopping free speech is what the GOP and the "tea party" are all about.

Did you just say that NPR was a liberal outlet?
If that's what you think then shouldn't NPR lose their founding (which is only a very small portion)?

Limiting Free Speech?
You haven't looked at the numbers, have you?
NPR will keep going strong even without any Direct or Indirect money from the government.
Andd since we know that's the case, how will anyone limit Free Speech?
They won't and they can't, at least not with NPR.

As I said earlier PBS is what I worry about.

They want everyone to become brainwashed to Fox.

That's a pretty silly statement too.
There are plenty of other media organizations out there, in fact we're using one right now..

You need to watch the video before you call anyone a lier. Schiller clearly says he grew up republican.

You might want to get some facts instead of FAUX!

I agree, but I expect James O'Keefe to get caught again. He will stumble over his ego.

Complete video is here - http://exposenpr.com/nprjudge.

When ypu put it all in context it acually bolsters NPR's credibility. Schiller repeatedly says NPR will not slant it's coverage even after they try to "lean on" him to do so for funding.

Yes he says some in the TP are racist. They are. The differance is unlike with FOX, NPR won't tolerate bias. See my post on page 2 for a complete description of the video.

thanks.

Paul William Tenny... I am just glad someone found it, and rest assured many of us pay attention to your stuff, thanks for the work.

Welcome to the Double Standard of Politics Melissa-3167074.

But don't let anyone fool you, it works both ways.

"that mob in Wisconsin, they are holding signs with Gov Walkers face with cross hairs over it, they have Hitler mustaches"

Did you see this on FOX? If so did you ever consider they were plants?

That would be them alright. Their guilt is such that they force mandates on us to buy useless E- fuel and hazardous lightbulbs and lord only knows what is next.

It's always a good indicator Mr.Tenny. All you really need to add is ".....and knows what is best for all."

He held an office in a media group that was supposed to be unbiased

The programming is unbiased

NPR makes a real effort to be balanced and air both sides of a debate without snickering. They are professionals.

reddirthippy

The programming is unbiased

I already proved that wrong red, sorry.

Look up Nina Totenberg and the fact that she's supposed to be an "unbiased" reporter.

If you had said many of the Programs were "unbiased" I could let it slide.
Afterall, how bias can a Jazz show or show about cars be. :-)

Then Fox would have no commentators, would they? What is said on the air; and what is said in conversation are kind of different in my little mind; but I could be wrong. But I also kind of think he was right. He was not on the air, folks. Try to absorb that.

Are the liberals on this page saying they actually don't support removing a biased republican from a position of power in the media?

mhr comment #32

This Liberal is saying I support removing Ron Schiller because of his unprofessional behavior and also I suspect him of being part and party to the scheme.