Juan Williams on NPR’s elitist Executives and their blinding conceit

Juan Williams says it best, and this could apply to so many on the left, but here he speaks in particular about the self-appointed elites at NPR recently caught on tape wanting to take an anonymous donation from two men disguised as members of a Muslim Brotherhood organization. I love Juan’s expression here of wide-eyed incredulity, like me, he’s beginning to see things in a very different way, after being treated to his shock, like dirt. His expression is priceless:

And, a witty and spot on article here from William Tucker about the embarrassing take down of NPR Sr. VP of Development and President of NPR Foundation Ron Schiller and Betsy Liley, NPR’s director of Institutional Giving, by conservative activists disguised as Muslim Brotherhood front men. They accuse the media of being run by Zionists (Ron Schiller doesn’t miss a beat on pronouncing that of course, the newspapers are in fact, run by Jews and that there is a bias toward Israel but that his NPR is of course, sometimes referred to as National Palestinian Radio ), here the article:

“The question that hangs in my mind, though, is this: How could people who think of themselves as so intelligent be such suckers? How could they be taken in by an American black and a bushy-bearded “Muslim” talking in a grade-B Hollywood accent and really believe they were being offered $5 million? After all, these are people who define themselves as being intelligent. They’re the “educated elite” of whom we supposedly don’t have enough of in this country. And yet they were no more alert than a bunch of high school dropouts sitting around a shabby ACORN office in Baltimore. How do you explain that?

Well, I think it is possible to offer an explanation. Here’s an attempt.

First, liberals can be suckered precisely because they think they are the only intelligent people in America. This smug confidence insulates them from having to pay attention to what anybody else is saying. The conventional wisdom among liberals is that people disagree with them only because they are stupid, uneducated, or have been bought off by the sinister forces of American capitalism. (The New York Times’current obsession with the Koch brothers is a case in point. Conservatives have the same mania over George Soros but they only resent Soros’s funding of liberal projects; they do not dismiss any liberal intellectual working in one of his organizations as being “bought off” by his money.)

You cannot find a liberal intellectual anywhere who can give you an honest, objective accounting of conservative positions on major issues. All they know is that conservatives are “stupid,” racist” and “scary” — boilerplate terms but unfortunately the exact words employed by Schiller on the tape. Practically the only liberal around who has ever been able to give a recognizable presentation of a conservative position is Barack Obama, who was always very good at repeating everybody’s argument before choosing the most liberal point of view. For that we elected him President.

By assuming they are smarter than everybody else, liberals leave themselves utterly vulnerable to anyone who plays on their sense of superiority. It’s a classic Italian Renaissance comedy — the wily servant who, with cajoling and flattery, outwits his master. It’s been going on for centuries. Liberal intellectuals could write you an unintelligible paper on the subject for the Modern Language Association, but they can never see it happening to themselves!

Second, for liberal intellectuals, race is the key to everything (alright, the holy trinity of race, class and gender, I’m abbreviating). If you get on the right side of the fence on race, everything else falls into place. It was an absolute stroke of genius for O’Keefe to send in an American black to tell Schiller he could have $5 million if only he could be a little more balanced in his coverage of Hamas and Hezbollah. Could it have possibly crossed Schiller’s mind, “I wonder if this guy is putting me on?” Never! His whole body would rise up in anguish to banish the thought. That would be racist! Besides, blacks are on our side! All American blacks are beholden to liberals because they support affirmative action and genuflect to Kwanzaa and therefore how could a good-hearted African American possibly be deceiving? Instead, one must only assume the proper patronizing tone, as Schiller did throughout…”

And, here more:

“So how could the nation’s “educated elite” possibly be played for such suckers? The answer is simple. They live in a bubble. Everybody says the same things and thinks the same things and anybody who is any different is to be marveled at as an exotic flower rather than engaged in serious conversation. Last Sunday’s New York Times ran a long profile, for instance, on Wayne Barrett, the longtime Village Voice investigative reporter who after 37 years has been unceremoniously fired, apparently for budget reasons. During the decade of the 1980s, according to the Times, Barrett’s greatest scoop was to reveal Cardinal John J. Conner, head of the New York Archdioceses, was…are you ready for this?… a Republican!”

Ah, yes, a REPUBLICAN!!!! Wowzer. What a shock the Cardinal was a Republican… Heh.

Read the whole thing, though it was so good I quoted most of it.

It’s the same with all the riffraff out there. Tea Party people are easy to identify. They are the industrial parts salesman you meet on an airplane in the Midwest or the local real estate agent who’ll give you the rundown on what people are buying these days. They know nothing about semiology and wouldn’t be able to discuss the hockey stick graph but they are intelligent people nonetheless who understand business and know how the world works.

I have noticed this painful tendency and I think I once indulged in it myself – oh shame. Yeah, I think I said it more than once, in so many words – ‘All those right wingers are just plain dumb, that’s why they believe as they do!’ The rubes! Hah.

I’m glad I got out of my bubble. Once your eyes are open, certain self-deceptions are not as easy to maintain and life becomes all the richer for it.


Another view on Juan Williams firing — Black Spin spins it right

Here, another interesting take on the Juan Williams controversy by Paul Shepard for Black Spin. He rightly notes that discourse in this country is being eroded by the current waves of PC:

“Since the days he took on the corrupt administration of D.C. Mayor-for-life Marion Barry in a series of stinging, award-winning reports in the Washington Post, Williams has been treated with suspicion among his black peers.
He always seemed willing to take on sacred cows within the black community.

Yet Williams wrote movingly about the civil rights struggles of the 1960’s in his book “Eyes on the Prize: America’s Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965.” But then, he worked for U.S. Senator Strom Thurmond, who is no friend of black civil rights thought.

As I said, Williams is one complicated dude.

But the latest flap to involve Williams has nothing to do with his complex relationship with the black community. Instead, it has everything to do with a wave of political correctness that is ruining the public discourse in this country.”

Here: Juan Williams firing blow against free speech?

Juan Williams – Neo-neocon can relate! (and so can I)

Neo-neocon in witnessing the recent Juan WIlliams firing is reminded of her own process of political change moving from left to right and how it felt to realize that people she thought previously were at least reasonable, were anything but…

She writes:
“I see it in Williams eyes when I happen to catch him on Fox these days: he’s spitting mad. Personally outraged, and most of all surprised.

I don’t know whether the NPR firing will lead to any political change for him, and it almost doesn’t matter. But it is interesting to watch—and to recognize—the emotional process he’s undergoing. He appears to be struggling with a sense of betrayal and of shock, because he seemed to have previously been a believer in the essential fairness of the liberal world of which he was a part….

It’s not for nothing that I have a category on the right sidebar entitled, “Leaving the circle: political apostasy” (a category to which I will assign this post when it’s done). I remember quite vividly when I first experienced the phenomenon. At the time, I was far from being a Juan Williams, having lived a relatively apolitical life. The reaction I got when I first politely voiced my relatively moderate disagreements wth the liberals who surrounded me sent me reeling, in the emotional sense.

I’ve adjusted in the many years since it first happened (neo’s not so neo any more). I’ve gotten used to it and come to expect it. But in some ways I’m still reeling, and probably always will be. It’s that profound an experience.”

I think I know exactly what she means, although certainly not everyone has reacted in this way, but certainly one proceeds with caution as one leaves the fold of the left.

Here, the short post:

The neofication of Juan Williams