« Obama’s Afghan Indecision | Main | Blogging & Freedom »

Tuesday, December 08, 2009



Ken, shouldn't you be applauding Mara Liason for her stand. Her boses were concerned, she said there wasn't any and she planned on continuing her appearances there. Isn't this the type of journalists we want? Someone who isn't going to buckle to her superiors and report the news?

And to imply that NPR is in co-horts with the Obama admin against FOX news with zero qualifications is below your usually higher quality...sorry, but it is.


I am applauding Liason. And I am sure you are right, Travis. The fact that NPR goes after Fox just as the Administration is going after Fox is pure coincidence. Of course it is. Who could think otherwise?


I can. It is collation versus causation. Just because two things happen at the same time does not mean that one caused the other. I got up every morning - and the sun rises - does that mean I cause the sun to rise? No it doesn't. Again, I think you are searching here. I will grant to you that the Obama administration is going after Fox News and that some of the brass at NPR didn't want one of their reporters going onto Fox News - does that mean that the Obama administration is telling NPR what to do - absolutely not.

I understand that you may think there is a relationship here and sometimes perception is reality - even if it isn't. This will once again be something that we disagree upon - which is understandable.



Take a deep breath, relax your muscles, and now imagine that this was the Bush Administration. Would you believe that Bush hadn't pressured NPR if the tables were turned?

I can't believe there wasn't a serious conversation on the topic of Fox between Administration apparatchiks and the NPR management. But if I am wrong, it doesn't look any better. It means that the culture of Obama's Washington is such that NPR independently comes to the conclusion that it should try to marginalize a network that seems unduly critical of the President.

Either way, the Administration and NPR were way out of line. Again, if this were Dubya, you'd be dusting off the 1984 analogies. The whole point of an opposition press is to oppose. Mara Liason stood up for us. Too bad the President couldn't do the same.

Travis Dahle

I agree with you that a lot of people would be going ape if it was the Bush administration - which they did against Fox News. There were a lot of complaints, which I am sure you heard, that Fox was using the same talking points that the Bush White House and other Republican's were using - and I am sure liberals cried foul!

My point is that I think it is beneath you to claim they are in co-hoots - you are a much deeper thinker than other bloggers out there and require some aspect of proof and logic for things.

I agree that it doesn't look good, which is why I said that perception is sometimes reality - what people perceive, even if it is wrong, becomes fact in their mind.


Travis: Thanks for the comments. I think you have conceded the only point I was making: that it looks bad. Do you really believe that NPR people don't talk to Obama people? I don't. But again, whether they do or not, this suggests a common culture in Obama-world.

I don't think there is any scandal if indeed NPR was or thought it was acting at the request of the chief executive. I don't know that any laws are violated by that. But NPR's attempt to pressure Liason into quitting Fox News was in fact a part of the war against Fox. That action was deplorable. Democratic government needs an opposition party and an opposition press. Obama and NPR, working in collusion or not, tried to eliminate one voice of opposition. I don't think I was out of line for noting that.


Wait, did we just agree on something? Probably not the first time, but wouldn't it be nice if most people in politics could discuss things reasonably and sometimes come to an agreement...sadly, it doesn't happen too often.

Thanks for the discussion.


You're welcome, Travis. And thanks for your comments. I like the idea of friendly conversation between folks with serious differences of opinion. As you say, it is not too common.

The comments to this entry are closed.