Juan Williams: Misinformed, disengaged, searching for a clue

[Buzz Clik]

1) The Diane Rehm Show (WAMU) had a focus this morning on the Republican-supported robo-phone calls that have been raising hell this past weekend. Rehm asked Juan Williams if he was aware of Democrats attempting to "suppress or confuse voters" by using similar calls. Williams's response: "Gee, Diane. That was a judgmental question." He then made it clear he had not been listening to the first few minutes of the discussion (in which it was documented that these calls were being made) and Williams started talking about Democrats spending a lot of money on the campaign in many states. "Whether you call (spending money) suppression of voters or trying to intensify your vote is a matter of judgment." Juan! Wake up!

2) Diane gave him a second chance about ten minutes later after more heated direct discussion on the same subject -- specific examples and calls and emails from listeners. Juan's insightful response? He talked about the Michael J Fox ads in Missouri. Goddammit, Juan! Listen!

3) A listener to the show sent in an email from New Hampshire talking about how the Dems in her Republican state are totally energized and it looks like the Dems might sweep the entire state, including the state legislature which has been dominated by the GOP since 1911. Diane asked Williams for his response, and he said he couldn't understand why Democrats would be wasting their time and money in such a traditionally Democratic state. "I'm surprised at the places where the Democrats are on the defensive."

That's three strikes, Juan. What the hell is your problem? Was the Sudoku puzzle particularly grizzly this morning and you couldn't put it down? Watching a tape of the Colts/Patriots game from last night?

I have never liked Williams because he constantly gives the appearance of having no stones. I may have misjudged him: his problem is he has no attention span.


http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/

[rodeodance]

1. Juan is generally a fense sitter who leans right most of the time.

[Buzz Clik]

4. Absolutely true.

His pronounced and pervasive fence-sitting is what gave me the impression that he has no nads. His right-leaning tendencies creep up only occasionally.

I have no problem with intelligent, informed people of any political persuasion. However, for him to occupy time and space on an important program in which he had no interest was ridiculous and inexcusable.

[Orrex]

8. Even worse...

He's often dragged out as the Liberal counterbalance to a given show's hard-Right leanings.

[WCGreen]

2. I bought one of his books...

Well, it basically sucked...

A little better than a high school civics class paper...

[MnFats]

3. and don't forget sexual harassment!

from '91 columbia journalism review 'dart':

DART to The Washington Post, for a journalistic equivalent of the self-serving ineptitude that marked the Senate Judiciary Committee's handling of the sex harassment case against Supreme court nominee Clarence Thomas. On Thursday, October 10 -- a day before testimony by Anita Hill (let alone her four corroborating witnesses) had even begun, the paper carried across the top of its op-ed page a six-column piece headed OPEN SEASON ON CLARENCE THOMAS in which staff writer Juan Williams vented his moral outrage over the liberals' "mob action" and "indiscriminate . . . smear," and asserted, with seemingly authoritative dismissiveness, that " had no credible evidence of Thomas's involvement in any sexual harassment, but she was prompted to say he had asked her out and mentioned pornographic movies to her." Unbeknownst to readers of Williams's piece; and unbeknownst to viewers who on the following day (Friday, October 11) happened to catch him expounding his views in conversations with Peter Jennings on ABC; and unbeknownst to listeners of the widely syndicated radio talk show hosted by Rush Limbaugh, who on October 10 read the column over the air; and unbeknownst (presumably) to Thomas's arch-defender, Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, who on Saturday, October 12, in tones of pious wonderment read into the record for the benefit of the American people the words of the "great journalist" Williams -- unbeknownst to all those countless millions, Williams himself had two weeks earlier become the subject of an internal inquiry into allegations of sexual harassment by several female colleagues. What's more, Williams's personal interest in the issue of sexual harassment would be unbeknownst to us still, if newly appointed Post executive editor Leonard Downie, Jr., had had his way: upon learning that media writer Howard Kurtz (who had been alerted to the rage among women in the newsroom) was preparing to write a story, he ordered Kurtz to stop. Not until the committee hearings had ended -- and not until television station WRC, in Washington, D.C., had broken the story on its six o'clock newscast on Monday, October 14 -- did the Post decide its readers were entitled to the facts behind that immeasurably influential column. On Tuesday, October 15, the story Kurtz had tried to write four days earlier finally appeared, along with a page 3 "Note to Readers." Acknowledging that the paper's normal practice of keeping confidential personnel matters involving the privacy of its employees was superceded by the public interest in this particular case, the note explained that news editors had failed to inform the editors of the editoral pages about the inquiry into the allegations against Williams. (In its lead editorial in that same edition, the Post argued that Thomas deserved to be confirmed.)

[Buzz Clik]

6. I was unaware of that article by Williams.

Thanks. I'd have written him off years ago if I'd only known...

[Wickerman]

5. I lost all respect for him in the run up to Afghanistan

He had an all afternoon NPR special on a Saturday. He literally trounced on anyone who tried to suggest alternatives to all out war. If he didn't scream at them he dismissed them midway thru their statement.

[Buzz Clik]

7. Rehm was clearly suprised at Williams's first response.

After that, she turned the conversation to him infrequently and never followed up.

[Crunchy Frog]

20. She should have nailed him on that response.

I like Diane Rehm, but like most people on NPR, she rarely displays any aggressiveness with Republican, or right leaning guests, maybe for fear of being labeled part of the "librul" media. Somehow, I just don't think that a Democratic leaning guest would be allowed to get away with something like that unchallenged.

This pervasive pattern at NPR is one reason why I will NEVER give them any contributions. And yes, I listened to that this morning and was PISSED. Juan Williams equated Dems spending money on races and doing GOTV with Repubs attempting to suppress votes and confuse voters, and NO ONE challenged him on it.

[UTUSN]

9. He's got PTSD from years of being abused by Brit HUME

For years on Faux Sunday Circus, he has been battered by HUME and more recently BOTH Hume AND Billy "William" KRISTOL. Juan gets a shell shocked look while he attempts to salvage an ounce of his testicles. Brit showers him with WITHERING CONTEMPT. Billy gets a Rethug/NeoCon Country Club SNIFF on his nose, like Juan SMELLS. It takes a toll on a man.

[ellacott]

11. This is the reason that I wrote him off

I didn't know about his sexual harrassment charges either.

He was unable to stand up tp Brit Hume. I remember the first time that Cheney was hospitalized(as VP). Brit angrily said to Juan that he knows that all the liberals wanted Cheney to die but it didn't happend. Juan just slinked down in his chair and didn't respond.

When O'Reilly was on Letterman when Letterman told O'Reilly that 60% of the stuff he says is crap Juan wason O'Reilly's show. He was defending Bill and telling him how Letterman was so mean and that O'Reilly was the bigger man.

In Juan Williams latest book he wrote that O'Reilly was the greatest TV personality on the air. Juan's book is very critical of Al Sharpton. O'Reilly brought Sharpton on the show with Juan. Sharpton challenged Juan on all his claims in the book and Juan couldn't back up any of them. Even O'Reilly had to agree with Sharpton.

[UTUSN]

12. Juan is a role model for Ruben NAVARRETTE on how to betray

your own home group----minority member (Black, Hispanic, Gay) who has sold out. NAVARRETTE benefitted from Affirmative Action (like Clarence), and then turned against AA *and* anything Dem. So NAVARRETTE recently recounted how he encountered Juan at a broadcasters confab and they traded war stories about how much flak they catch from their home minority membrs calling them Uncle Toms and such.

[Buzz Clik]

13. Poor, poor Juan.

:cry: :nopity:

[ecstatic]

19. hang out with dogs, you get fleas

I don't know what would happen to my sanity if I was forced to listen to BS from Brit Hume & Co. day in and day out. A long time ago I had the impression that Juan Williams was center or slightly left of center, but in recent years I've noticed that he is no longer operating with a full deck.

[Crunchy Frog]

21. BE a dog, and you'll get even more.

Juan Williams is nothing but a Puke shill.

[endarkenment]

10. Juan Williams was one of the asshats

who woke me up to how far right NPR had tilted. He is almost always a misinformed, disingenuous, rightwing hack.

[Strelnikov_]

14. Juan Is A Creation Of The NPR Milquetoast 'Earth Is Flat, Opinions Differ'

'journalism' factory.

And, no, NPR, sometimes there is only one side that is 'right' on an issue.

[Buzz Clik]

15. You're hoping for the Fox template to be applied to NPR?

Why?

Biased bullshit is biased bullshit whether is belongs to the right or the left.

[endarkenment]

16. Er, no. Pay attention.

It is simply a fact that the earth is not flat. A balanced dialog does not mean giving equal time and weight to flat-earthers. The right is trading in bullshit, deception, and distraction. They have to as the facts are indisputably not on their side. Giving equal time to reasoned fact based opinion and utter bullshit is not 'balanced' it is aiding and abetting the swindling of the american population. See John Stewart's impassioned moment of truth on Crossfire about how the media is hurting us, the american people, on this very issue.

[Strelnikov_]

17. ..

[Strelnikov_]

18. Like endarkenment Said. This Is A Krugman Quote From One Of His Books

a few years back, but I forgot the question mark.

"Earth is flat? Opinions differ" journalism.

That is, providing 'balance' by presenting an opposing viewpoint, no matter how inane the opposing viewpoint is.

"Iraq, quagmire or success? Opinions differ."