Posted on 08/16/2002 6:55:54 AM PDT by Elkiejg
Taliban tirade
We've been intrigued by the exchange of letters between a journalist in North Carolina and senior editors of National Public Radio in Washington about the definition and correct usage of "conservative."
"I am writing to demand an apology from NPR for using the word 'conservative' to describe the Taliban," Doug Morgan, a journalist who holds an English degree, wrote to NPR Ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin. "The news reader ended the story by comparing the current number of [Afghani girl school] enrollees to that during the reign of the 'conservative Taliban.'"
Mr. Dvorkin replied: "My own sense is that the use of the term in this case is entirely non-political and bears no resemblance to the political description you espouse. Indeed, Webster's dictionary gives nine definitions" of conservative.
He listed the various definitions, pointing out that the second — "tending to preserve established traditions or institutions and to resist or oppose any changes in these" — was the meaning employed in the newscast.
"With respect, Mr. Morgan, I don't believe that your political beliefs were impugned in any way," Mr. Dvorkin added.
Mr. Morgan said he doubted "anyone hearing the story in question looked to their dictionaries to find out what nuance the word meant to convey" and questioned why NPR's editors simply didn't drop the word from the story.
Bruce Drake, the NPR's vice president for news, informed Mr. Morgan that the newscast in question was based on an Associated Press story, dated Aug. 6, that carried the phrase "conservative Taliban."
The same story, Mr. Drake added, was printed in the San Jose Mercury News, the Miami Herald, the Florida Sun-Sentinel and a number of other newspapers.
"Frankly," Mr. Morgan responded, "those news outlets do not really matter to me because my taxes do not support them. On the other hand, my taxes do support NPR, the same NPR that consistently refers to the Senate as 'the Senate,' while referring to the House as 'the Republican-dominated House.'"
In conclusion, given the common American usage of "conservative" and "liberal," Mr. Morgan opined the Taliban in Afghanistan "more strongly resembled latter-day American liberalism in that it sought ever-increasing government control of the day-to-day lives of Afghanis."
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Could NOT have said it better myself. The Taliban had two standards of behavior - one for themselves and one everyone else. JUST LIKE THE RATS! The brutal methods used to punish people who didn't believe the way they believed reminds me of Communism - and Communism is the grandfather of the modern day RAT party.
Look the terms conservative and liberal have been completely misused in the US. Traditionally the conservatives were the same as the reactionaries...in that they were the party attempting to maintain the status quo. So of course the communists would be the conservatives in the Soviet Union....and the Taliban would now also be seen as such, even though both began as revolutionaries.
Personally, I hate the terms conservative and liberal because they do not mean what they say.....left wing logic and agit-prop at work. Why the political right in this country agreed to the left's semantics, I'll never understand. I continue to describe myself to lefties as a true liberal. The left is always trying to warp the semantic meaning of words, which is why this letter exchange occurred. This is why the right never knows how to respond when the left calls us Nazi's (national socialists)....because the nazi's were right wing....right of communists that is.
It's a perfect example of what this guy is talking about. The audio won't be available until 12 ET, but after that you can go here, scroll down about halfway to the story titled "Pope to Poland", and you can listen to exactly what this is about. See if what this lady is describing sounds like "conservatives" to you...
I learned then that NPR is probably the only solidly available news source across heartland America, and its blatant political bias had me cringing. But it did present my daughter and I the opportunity to discuss those NPR things that bothered me.
The result?
Myrtle Beach to Newport Beach -- Sixty hours elapsed time, forty hours driving, two nights in motels, saw encouraging American responses to 9-11 everywhere, had some great discussions father to daughter and vice versa, and NPR's political bias was pointed out to my daughter.
NPR is American liberalism's greatest propaganda vehicle, and conservative Americans are paying for it.
'Cause conservatives and Republicans join with liberals to fund it! Click on my name to see how YOUR Congress Critter voted when asked to reduce funding 1%.
I think it was during the '80's that I began to notice that NPR and ATC in particular was taking on a stronger and stronger political position. In particular, I think there was an attempt under Reagan to reform or de-fund NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and as I recall, All Things Considered went wall-to-wall with a totally political effort to thwart this effort. They basically went into fund-raiser mode, but not to raise funds; rather, they turned their air over to the task of rallying their listenership to lobby congress to fight Reagan.
Now, in 2002, the degree of heavy, constant, unrelenting agenda and bias in NPR programming has just about reached the point that (for me) the mental effort of constantly having to filter every word they say for bias in order to recover the occaisional piece of interesting information has just about reached the point of "what's-the-point," if you take my meaning.
If you want to hear what the Left is selling today, listen to NPR.
If you like your news presented with a megaton overload of political agenda, listen to NPR.
If you can't face the real world without handholding from the hand-wringers, listen to NPR.
You know what? I don't even particularly mind that they are publicly financed. At least this way, they are out in the light where they can be seen, instead of scurrying around the back alleys and Bierstube where they would be making even more trouble, in my view.
(steely)
I mind (grin)!
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson: Statute of Religious Freedom, 1779
Ok, you caught me, I lied. :)
Good observation! Visible malfunctions are far easier to diagnose and fix than hidden, latent or sneak-circuit failures.
Huh! You've just paraphrased one of my "principles of software development," which I put this way: "what you cannot see, you cannot make perfect."
One of the reasons that (God help me) I love Windows.
(steely)
now, on the right wing side, there are the shoot them all rednick/militant bunch, which I call "the foaming at the mouth neocons/born again. How do you like these names?
Or - if you want an insight to defeat our enemy, the Democrats, listen to NPR.
I consider NPR a very useful tool for scouting out what the Democratic party is planing / doing. They are the mouthpiece and remember the mouth is very close to the brain.
jriemer
They'll never be defeated. They cannot be defeated. Just forget that.
Stupidity, envy, greed and weakness will always be with us. The longing by the second-rate to find a soothing explaination for their sorry plight will always be with us. The belief that everything will be all right if you just give some of what you've got to me then I won't feel so crummy all the time will always be with us.
All we can hope for is to hold our own in a constant battle for equilibrium with the forces of decay, destruction, and darkness.
Not pessimistic, just realistic.
There are opportunities even in this, for those with imagination, energy, and courage.
(steely)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.