New Video: NPR Planned on Taking $5 Million From Islamic Group & Hiding It From Gov.

[The T]

Son? An elitist...is an elitist...your stigma is partisan. Unfortunately? You're too ill-informed, and stupid to understand the difference.

Your problem. Deal with it.

he'll respond by calling you a neocon, and when you ask him how he thinks you are a neocon and to define his usage, he will refuse

So why isn't Bush an elitist?

Seriously?

He

- Went to Yale
- Went to Harvard
- Comes from aristocracy
- Was rich, primarily because of family and connections
- Became governor of Texas after accomplishing little in his life except for having the Bush last name

I mean, anywhere else in the world, this is the definition of elitist!

Why would he not be considered one here? Because he didn't like to read books, wasn't a liberal, and didn't put airs on?

Bush IS an Elitist and a member of the OLD GUARD in the respect of Domestic Policy. As far as I am concerned? His saving grace is Foreign Policy as it relates to Terrorism.

 

[DiveCon]

Son? An elitist...is an elitist...your stigma is partisan. Unfortunately? You're too ill-informed, and stupid to understand the difference.

Your problem. Deal with it.

he'll respond by calling you a neocon, and when you ask him how he thinks you are a neocon and to define his usage, he will refuse

So why isn't Bush an elitist?

Seriously?

He

- Went to Yale
- Went to Harvard
- Comes from aristocracy
- Was rich, primarily because of family and connections
- Became governor of Texas after accomplishing little in his life except for having the Bush last name

I mean, anywhere else in the world, this is the definition of elitist!

Why would he not be considered one here? Because he didn't like to read books, wasn't a liberal, and didn't put airs on?

of course bush was an elitist

 

[Toro]

Oh, OK.

Thanks.

 

[The T]

So NPR is branching out, finding other sources of funding apart from taxpayers.

That's good, right?

Actually? They should cease Federal funding...and go it alone...and make it in the market if the market has a need for what they do? They will survive...if not? Adios.

Then they could merge with al-Jazeera!

They could call it En-PaZeera!

 

[Mini 14]

For the cheap seats:

O'Keefe is just another opportunist who's profiting off of the willful ignorance and dishonesty of the neocon parrots and pundits.

It wasn't O'Keefe that put the kibosh on Acorn, but Acorn's own internal screw-up regarding embezzlement and non-reporting of how it was resolved to Congress.

And now O'Keefe gets a fund raising exec giving audience to faux teabagger/neocon hating arabs, and agreeing with them. Pity there's no evidence that Shiller accepted and approved of that donation...pity that Schiller has NOTHING to do with programming or personnel.

As for the female Shiller exec getting canned....that was related to her handling of Fox whipping boy Juan Williams.

Once again, O'Keefe gets more credit than he deserves...yet no neocons want to talk about the little dweebs court conviction.

Whether Congress will bow to the hysteria and pull it's 2-3% funding of NPR is anyone's guess. But then, public contributions to make up the difference is surely not out of the question.

Yeah......they waited 6 months to fire her for wrongfully terminating an employee?

Yes, and unless YOU have some type of document from NPR contracts stating that there's a specific time frame for review and termination on all issues, you're insinuation means nothing.

And where is Mr. Schiller today? He can't even PAY someone to hire him.

And your point?

And what about Ms. Liley? Coincidence, right?

What about Ms. Liley? So far, YOU have made a lot of supposition and conjecture that essentially leaves out a LOT of information. Please state PRECISELY what how Ms. Liley is proof of federal defunding of NPR?

NPR agrees with O'Keefe. They haven't mad even the slightest claim that he misrepresented the evidence.

Oh, and you have the link to the official statement from NPR that says they "agree with O'Keefe"? Remember, they've fired Schiller for expressing personal bias in his job performance...NOT for saying "this is the official position of NPR"...and NOT for taking the money or making arrangements to do so.

And they FIRED the employees in his sting.

You need to get your terminology straight...a "sting" involves catching someone in the actual transaction of monies for fraudulent or disreptuable terms. This was not done....what occured was essentially bad publicity which accented or accelerated actions that were already in motion. Mr. Schiller was already leaving NPR, Ms. Shiller was already on the hot seat.

Is that also part of O'Keefe's master plan and opportunism?

I've already stated what O'Keefe is....and he's already been convicted once for his sleazy dealings.

If it is, he's a fucking genius!

If you think so, then that doesn't say much for you.

Is this kind of thinking genetic, or did someone shove an ice pick through your brain as a younger child? I can almost feel the spittle through the monitor!

You've obviously never managed employees, and I even have to question if you've ever BEEN an employee, based on your response to NPR's "length of review" over Williams. It simply doesn't work that way in the real world. I guarantee you that if Williams thought she was fired because of her firing of him, there would be a lawsuit filed within 30 minutes. He knows why she was fired, ahe knows as well, and we all do too (those of us with even the slightest business experience).

And I have no idea what you mean when you say that Liley is "proof of federal defunding." That isn't even a coherent sentence. It appears to be English, but not constructed with intent or understanding.

NPR's lack of response to O'Keefe directly, implies complicity. They realize he is right, and has forced their hand, so they fire each successive employee, and hope the problem will go away. O'Keefe says more is coming. I believe him, and I believe more people at NPR are going to be shown the door, up until the point that they have an argument against anything O'Keefe brings to the public. So far, they have not.

You should really stick to WoW, and leave this politics stuff to those of us who have moved out of Mom and Dad's basement. Obviously, you have *some* theory (apparently derived of your own mind, as I've never read anything similar), but no experience. Come back once you've dropped out of Daley Junior College, and we'll see if you've learned anything worthwhile.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Yeah......they waited 6 months to fire her for wrongfully terminating an employee?

Yes, and unless YOU have some type of document from NPR contracts stating that there's a specific time frame for review and termination on all issues, you're insinuation means nothing.

And where is Mr. Schiller today? He can't even PAY someone to hire him.

And your point?

And what about Ms. Liley? Coincidence, right?

What about Ms. Liley? So far, YOU have made a lot of supposition and conjecture that essentially leaves out a LOT of information. Please state PRECISELY what how Ms. Liley is proof of federal defunding of NPR?

NPR agrees with O'Keefe. They haven't mad even the slightest claim that he misrepresented the evidence.

Oh, and you have the link to the official statement from NPR that says they "agree with O'Keefe"? Remember, they've fired Schiller for expressing personal bias in his job performance...NOT for saying "this is the official position of NPR"...and NOT for taking the money or making arrangements to do so.

And they FIRED the employees in his sting.

You need to get your terminology straight...a "sting" involves catching someone in the actual transaction of monies for fraudulent or disreptuable terms. This was not done....what occured was essentially bad publicity which accented or accelerated actions that were already in motion. Mr. Schiller was already leaving NPR, Ms. Shiller was already on the hot seat.

Is that also part of O'Keefe's master plan and opportunism?

I've already stated what O'Keefe is....and he's already been convicted once for his sleazy dealings.

If it is, he's a fucking genius!

If you think so, then that doesn't say much for you.

Is this kind of thinking genetic, or did someone shove an ice pick through your brain as a younger child? I can almost feel the spittle through the monitor!

You've obviously never managed employees, and I even have to question if you've ever BEEN an employee, based on your response to NPR's "length of review" over Williams. It simply doesn't work that way in the real world. I guarantee you that if Williams thought she was fired because of her firing of him, there would be a lawsuit filed within 30 minutes. He knows why she was fired, ahe knows as well, and we all do too (those of us with even the slightest business experience).

And I have no idea what you mean when you say that Liley is "proof of federal defunding." That isn't even a coherent sentence. It appears to be English, but not constructed with intent or understanding.

NPR's lack of response to O'Keefe directly, implies complicity. They realize he is right, and has forced their hand, so they fire each successive employee, and hope the problem will go away. O'Keefe says more is coming. I believe him, and I believe more people at NPR are going to be shown the door, up until the point that they have an argument against anything O'Keefe brings to the public. So far, they have not.

You should really stick to WoW, and leave this politics stuff to those of us who have moved out of Mom and Dad's basement. Obviously, you have *some* theory (apparently derived of your own mind, as I've never read anything similar), but no experience. Come back once you've dropped out of Daley Junior College, and we'll see if you've learned anything worthwhile.

Or, he could at least come back after his balls have finally officially dropped.

Man, if these moonbats are so tesy now, it should be really entertaining to listen to them as more of this shit is realeased........PBS ANYBODY?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

NPR & PBS have had a Pro-Left/Democrat Anti-Conservative/Republican agenda for many years. I see no reason for them to receive Tax Dollars anymore. Why should Taxpayers be forced to fund Left/Democrat propaganda? I'm pretty sure George Soros and Michael Mooron can afford to keep NPR & PBS afloat. This latest NPR scam just doesn't surprise me. Time to pull the plug on their Tax-funding.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

For the cheap seats:

O'Keefe is just another opportunist who's profiting off of the willful ignorance and dishonesty of the neocon parrots and pundits.

It wasn't O'Keefe that put the kibosh on Acorn, but Acorn's own internal screw-up regarding embezzlement and non-reporting of how it was resolved to Congress.

And now O'Keefe gets a fund raising exec giving audience to faux teabagger/neocon hating arabs, and agreeing with them. Pity there's no evidence that Shiller accepted and approved of that donation...pity that Schiller has NOTHING to do with programming or personnel.

As for the female Shiller exec getting canned....that was related to her handling of Fox whipping boy Juan Williams.

Once again, O'Keefe gets more credit than he deserves...yet no neocons want to talk about the little dweebs court conviction.

Whether Congress will bow to the hysteria and pull it's 2-3% funding of NPR is anyone's guess. But then, public contributions to make up the difference is surely not out of the question.

I don't know this snippet form the Times article and tape;

At one point he says, “It sounded like you were saying that NPR would be able to shield us from a government audit — is that correct?”

Ms. Liley responds, “I think that is the case, especially if you were anonymous, and I can inquire about that.”

sounds pretty damning, she appears to be saying she will check into becoming an accomplice in taking the funds and hiding the identity of the source from a gov. audit.......*shrugs*.

How about this from WSJ which I've already posted and had ignored by the righties on this thread?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...oup-and-hiding-it-from-gov-8.html#post3412486

At one point, [in the phone conversation] Ms. Liley said NPR would like to have the organization's federal form 990, which are required by the Internal Revenue Service of nonprofit groups. Mr. Kasaam asked why, and Ms. Liley explained that it is standard practice. Later, she told Mr. Kasaam that what NPR's general counsel, Joyce Slocum, was putting together "was the simplest of things that we use, which would be a letter" of agreement.

The note continued, "The audits of our governmental grants are conducted by the same audit firm we hire to do our NPR financial audit." Ms. Liley added that she would send a draft of a gift agreement from NPR's legal counsel.

NPR also released email between the network and the group that it said demonstrated repeated refusals of the gift. In one dated March 3, Ms. Schiller recounted to colleagues a conversation in which she told a group member NPR needed to "sort out" issues regarding his group's tax status before it could move forward.

In one the following day, NPR General Counsel Joyce Slocum told a group member her organization was unable to find documentation verifying his group was in compliance with Internal Revenue Service rules for charitable organizations.

I understand why you want to ignore it, because it disproves your false claim that NPR was trying to hide the money. Tell me, genius, why would NPR repeatedly ask for IRS forms and get their legal team involved if they were planning on hiding the money?

 

[boedicca]

Because they are a defacto PR arm of the government and collude with their government associates to cook the books.

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

Because they are a defacto PR arm of the government and collude with their government associates to cook the books.

What a maroon

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

Son? An elitist...is an elitist...your stigma is partisan. Unfortunately? You're too ill-informed, and stupid to understand the difference.

Your problem. Deal with it.

he'll respond by calling you a neocon, and when you ask him how he thinks you are a neocon and to define his usage, he will refuse

Yeah, typical tactics...some punk usuing terms that they have no idea what it means...just talking points.

Wait. Aren't you the con who calls everyone you disagree with a 'statist'?

 

[Trajan]

Oh, OK.

Thanks.

well not quite; the media didn't want to class him along with Kerry and Gore ( Obama?) who had smiliar backgrounds because- they are smart and bush is/was stupid.

They didn't want to foster causative background, so they made him out to be a dummy, and dummies cannot be part of the elite because the elite are the academics and intelligentsia and are all better people and smarter than cons or republicans.

so his education was an affect, but elitism was not awarded as an effect....

 

[Ravi]

Bush was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and took every advantage of that fact.

That he talks like an idiot and likes to cut brush doesn't change the fact.

 

[Trajan]

For the cheap seats:

O'Keefe is just another opportunist who's profiting off of the willful ignorance and dishonesty of the neocon parrots and pundits.

It wasn't O'Keefe that put the kibosh on Acorn, but Acorn's own internal screw-up regarding embezzlement and non-reporting of how it was resolved to Congress.

And now O'Keefe gets a fund raising exec giving audience to faux teabagger/neocon hating arabs, and agreeing with them. Pity there's no evidence that Shiller accepted and approved of that donation...pity that Schiller has NOTHING to do with programming or personnel.

As for the female Shiller exec getting canned....that was related to her handling of Fox whipping boy Juan Williams.

Once again, O'Keefe gets more credit than he deserves...yet no neocons want to talk about the little dweebs court conviction.

Whether Congress will bow to the hysteria and pull it's 2-3% funding of NPR is anyone's guess. But then, public contributions to make up the difference is surely not out of the question.

I don't know this snippet form the Times article and tape;




sounds pretty damning, she appears to be saying she will check into becoming an accomplice in taking the funds and hiding the identity of the source from a gov. audit.......*shrugs*.

How about this from WSJ which I've already posted and had ignored by the righties on this thread?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...oup-and-hiding-it-from-gov-8.html#post3412486

At one point, [in the phone conversation] Ms. Liley said NPR would like to have the organization's federal form 990, which are required by the Internal Revenue Service of nonprofit groups. Mr. Kasaam asked why, and Ms. Liley explained that it is standard practice. Later, she told Mr. Kasaam that what NPR's general counsel, Joyce Slocum, was putting together "was the simplest of things that we use, which would be a letter" of agreement.

The note continued, "The audits of our governmental grants are conducted by the same audit firm we hire to do our NPR financial audit." Ms. Liley added that she would send a draft of a gift agreement from NPR's legal counsel.

NPR also released email between the network and the group that it said demonstrated repeated refusals of the gift. In one dated March 3, Ms. Schiller recounted to colleagues a conversation in which she told a group member NPR needed to "sort out" issues regarding his group's tax status before it could move forward.

In one the following day, NPR General Counsel Joyce Slocum told a group member her organization was unable to find documentation verifying his group was in compliance with Internal Revenue Service rules for charitable organizations.

I understand why you want to ignore it, because it disproves your false claim that NPR was trying to hide the money. Tell me, genius, why would NPR repeatedly ask for IRS forms and get their legal team involved if they were planning on hiding the money?

yes, I read the article early on and , one question I have is then why did they out her on administrative leave and why did schiller go?

 

[SgtMeowenstein]

I don't know this snippet form the Times article and tape;




sounds pretty damning, she appears to be saying she will check into becoming an accomplice in taking the funds and hiding the identity of the source from a gov. audit.......*shrugs*.

How about this from WSJ which I've already posted and had ignored by the righties on this thread?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...oup-and-hiding-it-from-gov-8.html#post3412486

At one point, [in the phone conversation] Ms. Liley said NPR would like to have the organization's federal form 990, which are required by the Internal Revenue Service of nonprofit groups. Mr. Kasaam asked why, and Ms. Liley explained that it is standard practice. Later, she told Mr. Kasaam that what NPR's general counsel, Joyce Slocum, was putting together "was the simplest of things that we use, which would be a letter" of agreement.

The note continued, "The audits of our governmental grants are conducted by the same audit firm we hire to do our NPR financial audit." Ms. Liley added that she would send a draft of a gift agreement from NPR's legal counsel.

NPR also released email between the network and the group that it said demonstrated repeated refusals of the gift. In one dated March 3, Ms. Schiller recounted to colleagues a conversation in which she told a group member NPR needed to "sort out" issues regarding his group's tax status before it could move forward.

In one the following day, NPR General Counsel Joyce Slocum told a group member her organization was unable to find documentation verifying his group was in compliance with Internal Revenue Service rules for charitable organizations.

I understand why you want to ignore it, because it disproves your false claim that NPR was trying to hide the money. Tell me, genius, why would NPR repeatedly ask for IRS forms and get their legal team involved if they were planning on hiding the money?

yes, I read the article early on and , one question I have is then why did they out her on administrative leave and why did schiller go?

I don't know why they ousted her because I don't have that inside information. But you can't tell me that NPR was trying to hide the money when they repeatedly asked for IRS papers from the group and were in talks with their legal team and outside auditors as to how they could legally accept the large donation.

 

[Toro]

Oh, OK.

Thanks.

well not quite; the media didn't want to class him along with Kerry and Gore ( Obama?) who had smiliar backgrounds because- they are smart and bush is/was stupid.

They didn't want to foster causative background, so they made him out to be a dummy, and dummies cannot be part of the elite because the elite are the academics and intelligentsia and are all better people and smarter than cons or republicans.

so his education was an affect, but elitism was not awarded as an effect....

TeaPartySpamurai told me once that an elitist is essentially a liberal who looks down on people and wants to tell them what's good for them. Having watched the term "elitist" thrown around by many on the right on this board over the years, to me, this is the most consistent application of the term by those using it as a political slur. But it doesn't jive with how one generally thinks of "elites" in all other manners.

 

[Trajan]

Bush was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and took every advantage of that fact.

That he talks like an idiot and likes to cut brush doesn't change the fact.

and? so do we have separate class's of 'elites(s)'?

Gore, Kerry, Obama = 'smart' 'sensitive' elites, Bush= 'dumb', 'callous' elite....?

( and- kerry didn't have real money till he hooked up with his first wife and gore was a member of the lucky sperm club like bush too) *shrugs*

 

[Trajan]

Oh, OK.

Thanks.

well not quite; the media didn't want to class him along with Kerry and Gore ( Obama?) who had smiliar backgrounds because- they are smart and bush is/was stupid.

They didn't want to foster causative background, so they made him out to be a dummy, and dummies cannot be part of the elite because the elite are the academics and intelligentsia and are all better people and smarter than cons or republicans.

so his education was an affect, but elitism was not awarded as an effect....

TeaPartySpamurai told me once that an elitist is essentially a liberal who looks down on people and wants to tell them what's good for them. Having watched the term "elitist" thrown around by many on the right on this board over the years, to me, this is the most consistent application of the term by those using it as a political slur. But it doesn't jive with how one generally thinks of "elites" in all other manners.

yes, I agree. elite was actually a favorable pejorative back in the day....now? *shrugs*

 

[taichiliberal]

NO...he's nailing the Elitists...

I find it funny when the supporters of the likes of GW Bush, Gov. Walker, Fox News and this cretin O'Keefe start throwing around the word "elitists". You see "T", the very people you die hard supported for 8 years of the Bush administration were all part of the very "elitist" group that you purportedly despise.... or are you unaware of their tax bracket, the schools they attended, the social circles they hang in, etc., etc.

Get your act together "T", and stop parroting Rovian rhetoric that has long since been exposed as convoluted nonsense.

Son? Daughter? Nephew? Husband? Wife? Cousin? Aunt? Uncle? An elitist...is an elitist...your stigma is partisan. No genius, I merely pointing out the hypocrisy of neocon parrots like yourself. Seems your quite willing to suck up to "elitist" so long as they push an agenda your comfortable with. Unfortunately? You're too ill-informed, and stupid to understand the difference.

Your problem. Deal with it.

See folks, once you point out the sheer hypocrisy and absurd convoluted logic of neocon dullards like "T" here, they just lose what cognitive reasoning skills they have and start babbling ass-backwards retorts. People like "T" are just amazingly willfully ignorant of the "elitist" circles of which many of their current conservative mantras and talking point are born, (i.e., the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, FreedomWorks).

 

[taichiliberal]

Son? An elitist...is an elitist...your stigma is partisan. Unfortunately? You're too ill-informed, and stupid to understand the difference.

Your problem. Deal with it.

he'll respond by calling you a neocon, and when you ask him how he thinks you are a neocon and to define his usage, he will refuse

So why isn't Bush an elitist?

Seriously?

He

- Went to Yale
- Went to Harvard
- Comes from aristocracy
- Was rich, primarily because of family and connections
- Became governor of Texas after accomplishing little in his life except for having the Bush last name

I mean, anywhere else in the world, this is the definition of elitist!

Why would he not be considered one here? Because he didn't like to read books, wasn't a liberal, and didn't put airs on?

You're dealing with willfully ignorant and insipidly stubborn supporters of the current new conservative GOP. They're also intellectual cowards....which is why your point will be dodged, denied or ignored. Hell, they're so dishonest that they can't even own up to being neocons!