SPLC to Add NPR To Hate Group List After Executive's Rant

Tolerance:

On the tapes, Schiller wastes little time before attacking conservatives. The Republican Party, Schiller says, has been "hijacked by this group." The man posing as Malik finishes the sentence by adding, "the radical, racist, Islamaphobic, Tea Party people." Schiller agrees and intensifies the criticism, saying that the 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."

Schiller goes on to describe liberals as more intelligent and informed than conservatives. "In my personal opinion, liberals today might be more educated, fair and balanced than conservatives," he said.

I look forward to Southern Poverty Law Center "hate group expert" Mark Potok listing NPR as a hate group. After all, Potok declared that Pamela Gellar and Robert Spencer constitute a hate group for far, far less inflammatory speech.

UPDATE, 03-08-11, 2100 (From Mike): Where does one start with such an irony and target-rich environment? By now, a great many worthy blogs have covered the factual situation in detail. Bob has already linked to several of those, and I’ll add a few observations and a bit of updated information, including an explanation of what entrapment really is. Additional links here, here, here and here.

SPREADIN’ ON THE IRONY WITH A TROWEL! DEPARTMENT: On March 7, NPR Chief Vivian Schiller (no relation to Ron Schiller) spoke at the National Press Club and denied that NPR spins the news in a liberal direction. Schiller claimed that NPR works hard to offer “journalism that presents no particular bias,” and that NPR gets “a tremendous amount of criticism for being too conservative.” Remember that this was the day before the release of the new O’Keefe video.

WHO YOU GONNA BELIEVE? ME OR YER OWN LYIN’ EYES? DEPARTMENT: As reported by the Daily Caller, NPR spokeswoman Dana Davis Rehm tried valiantly to distance NPR from Ron Schiller, the President of the NPR Foundation and NPR Senior VP for Development.

“The fraudulent organization represented in this video repeatedly pressed us to accept a $5 million check, with no strings attached, which we repeatedly refused to accept,” Davis Rehm said in an e-mail to The Daily Caller. “We are appalled by the comments made by Ron Schiller in the video, which are contrary to what NPR stands for.” Rehm also said that “Mr. Schiller announced last week that he is leaving NPR for another job.” Apparently Mr. Schiller will be working for the Aspen (Colorado) Institute. This was followed by a tweet from NPR Media Reporter David Folkenflik: “Therefore, according to NPR, departure of fundraising exec. Ron Schiller for Aspen Inst. was unrelated to the sting by James O’Keefe.” However, later in the day NPR announced that Schiller, who was scheduled to depart NPR in May has been, in some way, suspended pending some sort of review. Gotta get the story straight, folks!

BEEN THERE, DONE THAT, GOT THE T-SHIRT! DEPARTMENT: Former NPR Commentator, Juan Williams, who was also the recipient of some abuse from Mr. Schiller (and much from NPR not long ago) in the O’Keefe tape, appeared on Hannity on March 8th. Williams was not surprised by, but was disgusted with Schiller’s comments, calling them “so rude and condescending.” In an earlier interview he noted that the comments of Schiller reflected the nature of NPR. “‘This is how they talk in boardrooms and editorial meetings,’ explained Williams. ‘This is how they really feel.’” On Hannity, he also noted that “they attack anyone who disagrees with their elitist NPR point of view.” Other Williams comments:

“This is finally a window into how they really think.”

“They’re locked into their liberal orthodoxy. They think they’re better.”

“These people are just destroying NPR.”

ANALYSIS: Two of the highest ranking NPR officers are dining with two potential Muslim donors, donors who have identified themselves as affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, a well known sponsor of terrorism. Odd behavior for an organization trying to virtuously avoid forcibly accepting $5 million dollars. In the course of the meeting, the NPR officers engage in racism, anti-semitism, elitist condescension, and denigration of about 50% of the American public in that at least that percentage does not share orthodox liberal views.

To be absolutely fair, one might allow a certain amount of obsequiousness for a fund raiser trying to please a potential donor, however, the video would seem to suggest that Shiller and his companion were not merely responding neutrally and carefully to the crude and disgusting viewpoints of potentially wealth donors, but were ardently presenting what they clearly believe are the institutional values of NPR as features, not bugs, in the hope of realizing a substantial payday.

The comments of the NPR executives speak clearly for themselves, and no matter how far Vivian Schiller and other NPR PR flacks try to distance themselves from them, one need only google the situation revolving around Juan Williams to discover exactly the same smug liberal superiority, condescension and disdain so clearly on display on the video. This is obviously not an isolated incident, and virtually any sentient being who spends more than an hour or two listening to NPR’s flagship programs--I am and I have--will certainly understand that NPR is an ardently liberal organization. To be absolutely fair, NPR, particularly in its news coverage, is not obviously biased 100% of the time, but when they are, they are always biased to the left, and often, very far to the left indeed.

As is usual in such cases, many have already begun to attack O’Keefe, accusing him of underhanded tactics, and even of entrapment. Many have brought up the recent prank played on Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, claiming a sort of similarity. They are entirely wrong. Governor Walker, as revealed by the secretly recorded conversation, is an honorable man who did not denigrate anyone, and whose public and private views are identical. He disavowed nothing because he did not need to disavow anything. Con men all know the saying “You can’t con an honest man.” NPR, faced with the public exposure of its fundamental but carefully concealed and often lied about private views, during a time when the Congress is debating entirely pulling their taxpayer funding, has disavowed Mr. Schiller and is backpedaling as fast as it can.

Those who are crying “entrapment!” have no idea what they’re talking about. Entrapment is a legal term that has currency only when the acts of government operatives--the police or those directly acting as their agents--are involved. Entrapment is a potential defense, a defense which may be invoked only when someone has been arrested and is charged with a crime or crimes.

Entrapment is often claimed by defense attorneys, but is a defense much less frequently bought by the courts. In order to entrap, the police must entice someone who is not disposed to commit a criminal act into committing a criminal act. A classic case might be police officers who approach a citizen on the street, and with no real cause to believe that they might be a criminal or that they might be involved in the kind of crime being investigated, offer that person sufficient money or other things of value to convince them to commit a crime. On the other hand, when the police approach, for example, a known drug dealer and offer to buy drugs from him, they are certainly not committing entrapment. Engaging someone to do what they normally do, even if the police provide them with assistance of various kinds to do it, is not entrapment.

In this case, O’Keefe and his associates, not in any way acting as agents of the police, engaged two of the highest level NPR fundraisers to make a fundraising pitch, the kind of pitch they do as part of their jobs at NPR. The problems began when the NPR executives revealed, without being placed under duress, their true, institutional and personal stripes, and did so in crude and shameful ways. Their behavior was particularly reprehensible in that they, such self-regarded highly intelligent, uber-sophisticated urbanites, believed that the men they were soliciting were agents of a Muslim terrorist organization responsible for the deaths of many Americans, an organization which constantly works toward a universal caliphate.

This is one of the most remarkable parts of the story. Why would Americans, particularly those with the social, political views of NPR executives, so willingly seek to ingratiate themselves with men who, by their religion and relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, violently oppose virtually everything they believe?

Andrew McCarthy, writing in National Review Online, answers that question convincingly in a recent article (take the last link at the beginning of this update). I agree with his assertion, which might be summed up by the old Middle Eastern aphorism: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Islamists and leftists both seek a pure, perfected world characterized by their own distinct visions of social justice, and both, having as a common enemy, conservatives, democracies and the free market, are natural allies.

Even understanding this, what still amazes is the mental weakness of progressives who apparently cannot accept the reality that should they, in their alliance, be successful, should American democracy fail, should the free market collapse, should Sharia become the law, not of the land but of the planet, everything in which they believe would be swept away: Homosexuality, environmentalism, women’s rights, higher education “studies” programs, redistribution of wealth, political correctness of every kind, the arts and intellectualism. You name it, Islam not only opposes, but would obliterate it. Islam would obliterate them. Yes, I know that not every contemporary Muslim believes this way, yet if the Progressives and Islamists ever won, what Muslim would be able to resist?

That progressives apparently consider themselves to be such superior beings as to render them immune from the consequences of their beliefs, behaviors and policies is, perhaps, the most telling indictment. Pride really doth go before a fall.

If Congress does not entirely defund public broadcasting of every kind, it bodes poorly indeed for the future of the Republic. If they cannot agree on this, if they cannot save what is a pittance compared to the totality of the national debt, and a pittance wasted on an entirely unnecessary and now, obviously indefensible enterprise, is there truly any hope for the kind of immediate change necessary to save America? We’ll know soon enough, and if we’re very fortunate, we’ll have NPR, at least in small part, to thank for it. That’s irony sufficient to last a lifetime.