In A Free Society

…the government would not fund a major media outlet, taking taxpayer dollars to disseminate viewpoints that are anathema to many taxpayers. As Jefferson said, “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical.” NPR/PBS have been an abomination for American values since their inception.

Just in case you were wondering what I thought about the Juan Williams situation. And I actually like a lot of NPR programming. But I suspect that the programming that I like would survive just fine absent federal dollars. And if not, I’d survive just fine without it.

And Juan Williams apparently agrees. You know the old saying that a conservative is a liberal who just got mugged? Well, Juan just got mugged.

[Update in the afternoon]

A proposal for a “Juan Williams Law.”

This legislation would outlaw all government funding for any news organization, whether private or non-governmental in nature. This restriction would include not only National Public Radio but all domestic news outlets, whatever their ideology or bias, or even if they claim to have none. (I am not talking here, of course, of international operations such as Voice of America, which have the legitimate task of representing American interests abroad.)

The legislation would further outlaw any future stimulus funding or bailouts for news organizations, again irrespective of ideology.

It’s easy to understand that government financing of the news is at best unseemly and at worst totalitarian. The possibilities for corruption are myriad. I am not one to dwell on what the Founders intended, but I am reasonably certain they didn’t want a Fourth Estate that was bought and paid for by the government, even in part.

I would go further and argue that it’s a violation of the establishment clause, given the degree (and it’s a large one) to which “progressivism” is a religion. Juan was duly punished for his heresy.

57 thoughts on “In A Free Society”

  1. This entire “they win if..” line of thinking is idiotic. So when the US government during WWII warned citizens to be on the look out for Japanese/German subversion, sabotage etc. did that meant “they have won” because we actually changed our way of life slightly? No, it was simply a reaction made in order to meet the challenge of being AT WAR. And believe it or not, we are at war today, with muslims and no, not all muslims are terrorists but all the terrorists we’ve been at war with the past 9 years have been muslims. The wedge between the muslim world and the west was driven in on 9/11, and it wasn’t our doing. The idea that we can win the war if we just don’t say anything divisive about muslims is ludicrous.

    How about this as a recipe for the enemy winning: ignoring facts and going on as if all was right and good between muslims and the civilized world and meanwhile they plot successful attacks because people like Matula turned their heads the other way rather than risk appearing (in his eyes) to be “afraid”.

    I don’t think that Juan Williams really believes that every person dressed in “muslim garb” is out plotting an attack but it is perfectly natural that seeing someone dressed in that manner would cause one to at the very least raise an eyebrow given the events of 9/11/01. And before you regurgitate your same tired line again yes I know the 9/11 terrorists weren’t dressed in muslim garb.

    But the link is there: muslim garb / muslim terrorist. Only the blind and the stupid can’t see that.

  2. Yet you find no irony in reading Juan’s mind? He said he felt anxiety. You would disown him for being honest.

    I’m not reading his mind, I’m reading his words, words that he has stood behind. I don’t question his honesty, I question his intelligence and rationality — two things I expect from someone paid millions to share his opinions on public policy.

    But the link is there: muslim garb / muslim terrorist. Only the blind and the stupid can’t see that.

    The only link is that they’re both Muslim. If you think it’s a good idea for all non-Muslim Americans to be wary of Muslims, simply because they are Muslims, then that’s textbook bigotry.

    The Muslim terrorist in Muslim (sic) garb, boarding a commercial airliner, is not a phenomenon that has been observed in nature. It exists only in the active imaginations of simple or prejudiced minds.

  3. The only link is that they’re both Muslim


    And guess who commits 99.9% of all terrorism in the world today?

    That’s right, MUSLIMS. You can add the qualifier “extremist” or “radical” if you like, but they’re still muslims. The extremist radicals may be a subset of the wider muslim community, but to anyone paying attention that “subset” seems to be a larger percentage of the whole every single day.

  4. Cecil,

    [[[warned citizens to be on the look out for Japanese/German subversion, sabotage etc.]]]

    Except the ones the Japanese and German’s sent over did there best not to look like Japanese and Germans. So looking out for folks of those nationalities did no good. All it did was give the U.S. a black eye for rounding the Japanese up and putting them in concentration camps. And yes, you would probably be one of those supporting such measures even though the Japanese and Germans that had immigrated to the U.S. were as loyal as any Americans. Look up the history of the “Go for Broke” Battalion sometime. Yet, thanks to bigotry many lost everything they had.

  5. And guess who commits 99.9% of all terrorism in the world today?

    That’s right, MUSLIMS.

    Your stats are wrong. Check out the State Dept.’s Country Reports on Terrorism, and you’ll see lots about non-Muslim terrorist groups (Tamil Tigers, ETA, FARC, Shining Path, Real IRA, New People’s Army, etc.).

    But worse than that, you are looking at the wrong statistic. The relevant statistic is that 99.99+% of Muslims, and 99.999+% of Muslims that you are likely to encounter in the West, are completely innocent of terrorism. When you cast suspicion on a Muslim, simply for being a Muslim, you are almost certainly judging that person unfairly.

    And they were put in those camps by everyone’s favorite Democrat, Franklin Delano Roosevelt!

    Feel free to point out any modern day Democrat who admires FDR for internment. That view seems to be limited to the likes of Michelle Malkin.

  6. Andrea,

    Yes, such is the strength of a “band wagon” effect, to encourage folks who should know better to make stupid decisions.

Comments are closed.