Skip to main content

Juan Williams on the Vicious Far Left

I don't care for Bill O'Reilly. Never have. He is rather a pompous ass who has earned righteous condemnation, ideological and otherwise. He should have been left doing tabloid reporting on Inside Edition.

Juan Williams, who appeared on O'Reilly's program last night, is another story. I have been watching Williams as a commentator for far longer than O'Reilly has been around (and whom I don't watch at all, save occasional snippets). Williams has always made valid points from his ideological (liberal) perspective, without being nasty or confrontational (like O'Reilly is).

Granted, Williams is about as watered-down a liberal as you are likely to find on Fox News, a la Alan Colmes.

(These days you are just as wan to find any reasoned or articulate non-leftist viewpoints given air time on MSNBC - which has possibly sunk even lower than Fox News in its talking head ideological purism, smirking demagoguery, and infantile camera-mugging.)

For those further out on the edge of the collectivist left wing, Williams' failure to serve as one of their useful ideological automatons is, of course, unforgivable.

Williams finally unburdened himself about how the screeching angry anti-Republicans/anti-conservatives have descended so far into out-in-out pack-dog viciousness and echo chamber orthodoxy, enforced by verbal truncheon.

They have perfectly co-opted, if not surpassed, the bombastic nastiness of the O'Reillys, Limbaughs, and Hannitys of this world.

Scroll to 0:52 for Williams's comments.

Comments

I always liked Juan Williams. Though I may not agree with him on everything, he talks sensibly and without rhetoric.

WOW. The statements he made about the far left are damning ! And I have found it to be so true. You can see it right here in the Delaware blogosphere, as Steve as pointed out many times.

Instead of making an honest point, or trying to, people get all personal and throw out statements for effect. It is dishonest and does not help the debate whatsoever.

I find it sickening.
Anonymous said…
Poor wittle Ty-wer. Are your wittle feewings hurt by all the vicious far left commentary? Awwwwwwww. Boo hoo hoo.

And you're always so polite and kind and respectful of everybody else. It just isn't fair, is it?

You poor helpless thing. I am sorry that people are so meany-mean to you.

Anonone
Tyler Nixon said…
Instead of making an honest point, or trying to, people get all personal and throw out statements for effect. It is dishonest and does not help the debate whatsoever.

Right on, Shirley!

And you're always so polite and kind and respectful of everybody else.

Thanks, anon, I appreciate your noticing.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...