juan williams firing - fucked up or not?

[tvashtarkatena]

Porter should animate the redunceduncy. Make the Nitrox dummy a gay Mexican for effect.

Edited October 25, 2010 by tvashtarkatena

[JayB]

No silly Billy, I'm just trying to rile Jay_B up by implying that he's in agreement with the folks over at The Nation.

 

I'm always delighted and surprised in equal measure when contemporary "liberals" lose their bearings and stray into the ideological terrain that's always belonged to classical liberals.

 

I suspect that the folks at the Nation will soon realize they've lost all of their bearings and signposts and flee back to the familiar territory of illiberal statism when it suits them.

 

Nice "liberalism" you got there that upholds the denial of First Amendment rights for most people during the majority of their waking hours (while at work). Add to that the "right" of property owners to censor speech while on their property and you've effectively restricted speech to people's cars and homes. Funny kind of freedom...

 

What kind of free-speech protections would you like to see the government enforce in workplaces and on other people's property?

 

When will you be making your living room available as a no-holds barred free-speech venue, and when can we expect to see the flyers for the Westboro Baptist Church rally you'll be hosting there?

[JayB]

I'm always delighted and surprised in equal measure when contemporary "liberals" lose their bearings and stray into the ideological terrain that's always belonged to classical liberals.

 

I suspect that the folks at the Nation will soon realize they've lost all of their bearings and signposts and flee back to the familiar territory of illiberal statism when it suits them.

 

Nice "liberalism" you got there that upholds the denial of First Amendment rights for most people during the majority of their waking hours (while at work). Add to that the "right" of property owners to censor speech while on their property and you've effectively restricted speech to people's cars and homes. Funny kind of freedom...

 

When the veneer comes off the "liberty" rhetoric, it becomes clear that only the right to private property should be enforced according to regressives. To think these people claim ownership to the main current of thought coming out the enlightenment is rather laughable.

 

Free speech is a property right? Interesting.

 

 

[JayB]

"Racism is a lazy man's substitute for using good judgment ... Common sense becomes racism when skin color becomes a formula for figuring out who is a danger to me.” ----- Juan Williams

 

 

...but that was then, and now is, well, now.

 

The firing of Bill Maher for saying 9-11 was blowback was fine, the firing of Donahue for being anti-war was fine, the firing of Sanchez for saying jews controlled the media was fine, the firing of Helen Thomas for saying jews should get out of Palestine was fine, ad-infinitum ... In fact, the firing of anybody because employers can fire at will is fine ... but the firing of Williams for his bigoted comment on the most racist cable network in the US is an attempt on freedom of speech. Williams is clearly not the only one having a problem with consistency.

 

They're all fine.

 

As long as they aren't being punished by the government, there's no First Amendment issue at play in any of those cases.

 

 

[j_b]

we already know that you don't really believe in any other right than those deriving from owning property.

[j_b]

When the veneer comes off the "liberty" rhetoric, it becomes clear that only the right to private property should be enforced according to regressives. To think these people claim ownership to the main current of thought coming out the enlightenment is rather laughable.

 

Free speech is a property right? Interesting.

 

It's not what I said. I said that your rhetoric about free speech was empty rhetoric because you don't believe in free speech in the workplace.

[j_b]

What kind of free-speech protections would you like to see the government enforce in workplaces and on other people's property?

 

Speech should be free when it doesn't impact job performance. Firing at will is consistent with authoritarian rule.

 

When will you be making your living room available as a no-holds barred free-speech venue

 

here come the silly hyperbola. Nobody is comparing your living room to a workplace.

[Off_White]

No silly Billy, I'm just trying to rile Jay_B up by implying that he's in agreement with the folks over at The Nation.

 

I'm always delighted and surprised in equal measure when contemporary "liberals" lose their bearings and stray into the ideological terrain that's always belonged to classical liberals.

 

I suspect that the folks at the Nation will soon realize they've lost all of their bearings and signposts and flee back to the familiar territory of illiberal statism when it suits them.

 

Nice "liberalism" you got there that upholds the denial of First Amendment rights for most people during the majority of their waking hours (while at work). Add to that the "right" of property owners to censor speech while on their property and you've effectively restricted speech to people's cars and homes. Funny kind of freedom...

 

What kind of free-speech protections would you like to see the government enforce in workplaces and on other people's property?

 

When will you be making your living room available as a no-holds barred free-speech venue, and when can we expect to see the flyers for the Westboro Baptist Church rally you'll be hosting there?

 

Personally, as an employer in the construction industry, I appreciate the fact that my employees are "at will" employees and I can fire them for any reason at all. If they flip shit to my frequent lesbian couple clients, they're out of there, ditto if they want to make racist jokes. I had a guy in a job interview declare that he was a born again Christian. He really twitched when I told him that I was an equal opportunity employer and I wouldn't hold that against him. (I should have not hired him for several other reasons, but that's a long painful story).

 

Anyway, as a sole proprietor, I very much appreciate that I can make my company reflect my values, rather than be forced to employee racist sexist drunken meth-head assholes because their habits and personalities qualify them as disabled or protected. Free speech yes, but not necessarily on my payroll.

 

 

[rob]

BALLS!!!!!

[j_b]

So you don't have problem with someone being laid off because their speech shows they aren't religious enough?

 

Someone insulting your client clearly committed a professional error and should/could be sanctioned for it.

[Jim]

 

As long as they aren't being punished by the government, there's no First Amendment issue at play in any of those cases.

 

Agreed. NPR was exercising it's perception of Juan's job as a news analyst vs. a commentator. He can now go do what he wants to at Fox. You may not like the outcome but there are no First Amendment issues involved.

[j_b]

So someone being fired for saying something while it didn't affect their job performance isn't a free speech issue?

 

You do know that the US is the only OECD country without free speech in the workplace?

[Off_White]

Oh, I might have a problem with that j_b, but as a person, not necessarily as a system. Here's an example:

 

The local Habitat for Humanity Restore, selling recycled building materials (a concept I fully support) fired a bunch of the employees from the existing business they bought to get established in Olympia because they weren't sufficiently "Christian". Those folks went out and started a competing business who did well for awhile, and expanded their purview to include deconstruction services, but when they hit hard times and fell behind on the rent, the damned Habitat Restore negotiated a secret deal with the landlord, and once the rent was paid up in full, Olympia Salvage was evicted (and ultimately doomed) and Habitat Restore took over their space, capitalizing on the business those folks had built on the space.

 

Now, as a remodel contractor, I have a dilemma. I want building materials to be recycled and reused, but the only show in town are a bunch of Christian double dealing fuckwits that I wouldn't piss on their faces if their throats were on fire. I've decided that the reuse of resources is more important, so I donate materials, take every opportunity to tell them that their god would be offended by the way they treat other people, and tell the story to everyone I know.

 

I've made my peace with their right to run their business as they see fit, and wouldn't trade away my rights to run my business to reflect my values for the sake of messing with theirs.

[j_b]

I am confused because from your earlier post I understood that you valued tolerance of other viewpoints within your biz as long as it didn't interfere with your clients.

 

When I ran my business, people's belief and speech were totally off the radar as long as they did their jobs. In fact, it isn't uncommon that I feel closer to people with whom I don't share many values.

[ivan]

i agree there's no 1st amendment thing going on - i think the juan williams thing is fucked b/c it flies in the face of the values of most hippie-liberal types who listen to npr, mainly that folks should feel free to discuss their thoughts regarding the world aroudn them w/o fear - i appreciate that npr's more or less a business and has the right to fire folks for bringing the business into disrepute, i just don't feel that's what old juan did

 

anyhow, no more than crocodile tears for homeboy - he's getting paid anyhow, and his voice was a bit whiney - i can't remember hearing anything from him that i though was way out in left field...

[Jim]

So someone being fired for saying something while it didn't affect their job performance isn't a free speech issue?

 

Hmmm. I thought his job was a news analyst. He decides to go moonlight and spout off opinions that NPR deems interfers with his job. Yes, they can fire him. No, there are no free speech issues here. He can go ahead and spout anyplace he wants; NPR decided it did not mix with how he was employeed. It was in their view, unprofessional and recurrent behavior.

 

 

 

 

[j_b]

I agree that Williams broke journalistic ethics and lost credibility, which destroyed his ability to do his job but the discussion has broadened to "firing at will" and the lack of free speech in the American workplace.

[prole]

 

The most exhaustive account to date of this distracting-by-design kerfuffle here.

[Peter_Puget]

I am confused because from your earlier post I understood that you valued tolerance of other viewpoints within your biz as long as it didn't interfere with your clients.

 

When I ran my business, people's belief and speech were totally off the radar as long as they did their jobs. In fact, it isn't uncommon that I feel closer to people with whom I don't share many values.

 

I though thtat might be the case. Hey Combat 84 are playing this weekend why dont we go check out the show!

[prole]

I agree that Williams broke journalistic ethics and lost credibility, which destroyed his ability to do his job but the discussion has broadened to "firing at will" and the lack of free speech in the American workplace.

 

In case anyone was thinking that the defacto gag rule exercised by employers only applies to the workplace these days...

 

 

Edited October 25, 2010 by prole

[rob]

this thread is total balls.

[Hugh Conway]

this thread is total balls.

 

try not to have your monitor on your chin

[rob]

this thread is total balls.

 

try not to have your monitor on your chin

don't be such a shitty shitty fag fag

 

[ivan]

[Jim]

The most exhaustive account to date of this distracting-by-design kerfuffle here.

 

I think this is the best. Almost makes me want to sign up for cable!

 

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-25-2010/npr-staffing-decision-2010