Publius

That Juan Williams can express sincere, thoughtful remarks about one of the most controversial issues today without being fired by listener supported radio.

Id.

Rehire Juan Williams.

Honest, thoughtful commentary without fear of reprisal.

John Lobell

There is only one topic for today, and that is NPR’s firing of Juan Williams. I will not go into detail on this, but with the comments by the CEO of NPR, this is nothing less than the left devouring its own. As someone old enough to have parents who lived through the Show Trials and Darkness at Noon, I am saddened to see that we are here again.
There is only one possible response on the part of WNYC, and that is withdrawal from the NPR network, and working with other INDEPENDENT public radio stations to share programming on an individual basis when appropriate.

SholomRav

That the Bill of Rights, in our Constitution, guarantees certain rights of speech, religious practice, and political choice to all Americans.

There is no civility. Whether there is actual respect or camaraderie between legislators, it is not acceptable to admit even conversation, let alone respect for one another's ideas.

I'm at a loss, short of locking them in a room until they realize that their job is to pass legislation to make the government run better, not posture for the next election.

Can you please address the issue of Juan Williams being fired today by NPR? This seems an important free speech issue that cuts pretty close to home.

ET

Free enterprise, governed by laws.

Negotiating skills. It has become a board game of "my party must win!" and sends the message that they do not owe the people the governing tasks they need and deserve.

.

Members of Congress should go through what every employee goes through each year: setting annual objectives and evaluation of their performance

BrettG

Rule of law. Taking care of all our residents

Finance, media coverage, FOX/<urdoch, E-voting machines with proprietary software.

public finance

Nothing. In the USA, and elsewhere, politics is doing what it's suppose to do which is to keep those with power, in power. The rest doesn't matter.
If you had asked: what's breaking this country? I would have then answered: politics.
One flaw in politics, as I see it, is its intrinsic hypocrisy. The great majority of politicians are politicians to serve their needs, whatever these might happen to be. But they'll never admit to this; they'll publicly swear that the only reason they are in politics is to serve their respective constituencies.
This is an ancient lie that's been repeated countless times but, somehow, the populace continues to believe it. Why this credulity exists on the part of the people might be related to their ignorance, learned piety [usually taught by the politicians co-conspirators, the clergy], etc.
Those very few ethical individuals, who also happen to be politicians, either conform with the status quo, remove themselves from politics, or they'll experience a fate similar to that of Pertinax.
Greed is very much a part of human nature and, by extension, of human enterprises. Unfortunately, there is no known immunization from greed's insatiable appetite with which to inoculate our beloved politicians.

Alex

Freedom of expression is a critical right

I'd like to ask your opinion about the reports that NPR employees are "banned" from the "March on Sanity" in Washington. (I'm aware that you generally refuse to discuss issues like this).

Was there some ban on NPR members attending Glenn Beck's rally that we never heard about? If not, what's the difference?

What is happening to NPR that employees are banned from going to a rally as private persons, on their own time (and also warned against placing bumper stickers on the their cars).

What is happening in the corporate American workspace, that managers feel they have the right to openly make such demands?

We have a rising tide of corporate/special interest money shaping every aspect of intellectual discourse, from corporate-owned newsertainer news, "Force multiplier" schills placed by the Pentagon as "independent experts" promoting the Iraq war, all manner of "think tanks" questioning the scientific consensus global climate change - and all manner of similar efforts.

The supreme court's "citizens united" ruling, has opened the floodgates on secret corporate campaign cash - which aslo serves as an indirect way to influence media outlets who benefit from the lucre from these secretly-funded PACs

For starters, I'd like Brian Leher to discuss the NPR policy on the air.

I'd like the author of the NPR policy on banning workers from the "march on sanity" to step forward, identify themselves, and engage in an interview with a respected journalist to discuss the decision.

I would like to see anti-trust provisions enforced, and other legislation introduced to break up the corporate ownership of news outlets.

I would like to see legislation to overturn the "Citizen's United" SC ruling.

I have been a long-time admirer of Brian - from the first week his show went on the air.

But I find him increasingly difficult to listen to. "Dialogue, not Diatribe" was a good slogan in the 1990's - but in todays world of Ken Tomlinson, Rove, Citizen's United, and the Koch Brothers.

It's a little like watching the West Wing in 2005 - a nice, liberal fantasy, as authorized torture and began the "US attorney purge" out there in the real world.

But NPR has been very cautious reporting on those issues too.

ZeitGeist

The is no room for "free" in a Capitalistic society. Capitalism is eating itself. After bailing out the banks who got us in this mess, we turn to them for help only to be denied loosing our jobs and homes. While its true there is unlimited opportunity here! What it takes to provide that is surely not "Free"!

Until there is another choice to break up this two party system we will stay dead locked to the ebb and flow of polital white wash all talk and no movement. We need the people to participate. If the IRS can track everyone and social security can there is no reason in 2010 that people do not participate in the activity of there country no matter their beliefs polital or otherwise.

I would hope to eventually have it manditory to vote. Either by fining citizens who did not vote , or by giving a tax credit to citizens who did. Or both! Something similar to Australia.

LarryP

That you have basic fundamental rights and beyond that you're subject to tons of government intervention.

We've built a huge infrastructure that is unsustainable, especially since no one (politicians or citizens) is ever willing to say no or give back something that they already had. As long as partisanship runs so deep, there can never be true progress.

If I knew, I'd run for office. My best guess is that this can only be fixed by individual's rising above the partisanship and working together. But that still leaves the question; "who's to say what's in the best interest of the country?".

I think that fact checking and following the money in a non-political way is very helpful. Give people a way to cut through the noise and understand the facts. The media is a big part of the problem between the 24 hour news cycle, biased reporting passing itself off as journalism, and not having to time to present both sides of the story. Tell people what both sides can agree on, where the differences are, and what the facts/assumptions are -- and they can make better choices.

Mary

We have the right to vote, state our opinions, disagree with the government and each other. We have the right to make and enforce laws that try to guarantee fairness. Many people in the world don't have these rights. We take them for granted.

People don't bother to vote, don't bother to discuss and understand issures. I think that, in part, they are put off by negativity and hypocrisy among the politicians. But, in this day and age, it is also difficult and time consuming to get and analyze facts. One example: some corporations and rich people have succeeded in touting the phrase "job-killing taxes". (Succeeded by spending lots of money in the effort.) The conversation is not about what we can afford or what is FAIR, but this myth that taxes are always bad. Tax rates now are very low for high earners and in light of the deficit, that is irresponsible.

1) pass law to reveal donors to political ads and anything else that could combat the disastrous Citizens United ruling
2) pass redistricting reform
3) raise the level of discourse, especially on taxes. I don't know how to do this except by giving money to nonpartisan groups like League of Women Voters and Common Cause.

Yes - get out the facts. Tax rates are so much lower now than they were before 1980. The recession started in 2007 when the Bush tax cuts were in full spring.
Also, the debate can't be about big vs small government. It has to be about good and big enough government. If there is a natural or terrorism disaster, we expect gov't to help. I want a gov't big enough and honest enough to protect me from businesses that pollute, sell tainted food, bring down the financial system, etc. Ask Tea Party people what part of that they are willing to take care of by themselves.

Dan Kelly

It means that we each accept responsibility for ourselves and our families.We do for ourselves and our neighbors, and we do the right thing because it's right and not because the law tells us to.

Our sense of responsibility to and for one another.The unspoken code of integrity.The understanding to be honest because it's honorable.

The Fed. needs to reinstitute regulation on Wall Street transactions.We as a society need to recover all illegally obtained profits in all businesses.The officers of our Government at all levels need to set new tone of accountability for the taxpayers to follow.F.D.R. imposed the first real regulation on Wall Street because it is needed.

athar murtuza

we are not ruled by caste or wealth or creed. Nor are we free to impose control on others---one cannot be a god wanna in a free country.

it is under the subjugation of Rush Limbaugh---bring up the law that kept such trouble mongers off the air.

through seeing to it that free speech is not abused by being made into rabble rousing.

our politicians should not be owned, operated, and led to war by lobbyists.

Bill

there are no real reporters/journalists anymore!!!!

THE LARGEST SOURCE OF MONEY GOING TO OUR ENEMY CAME FROM MONEY SENT BY CHENEY AND BUSH!!! THROUGH THEIR MID EAST CO-CONSPIRATORS!!WHY ARENT THEY TRIED FOR HIGH CRIMES--WHERE ARE OUR PRIORIES?

why dont the reporters talk about the REAL REAL THREAT TO USA SOVEREIGNTY!! THAT IS THE CORRUPTION WITHIN--BILLIONAIRES, BANKERS, FORMER POLITICIANS ARE EXTORTING AND LOOTING THIS COUNTRY (IN TO THE FUTURE) AND IN ORDER TO DO IT THEY GLADLY AND KNOWINGLY LETTING ALL THEIR CORRUPT CO-CONSPIRATORS IN MIDDLE EAST STEAL HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF OUR MONEY ONLY TO GIVE THAT MONEY TO OUR ENEMIES WHO ARE KILLING OUR SONS!!!

WE ARE PAYING TO KILL OUR OWN SONS--ITS THE DEATH OF AMERICA--THE MOST SEVER PERVERSION--ITS SO TERRIBLE, THE OSTRICHES BURY THEIR HEADS

SICKNESS OF THE SOUL--ITS SPIRITUAL, OUR SOCIETY HAS BEEN INFECTED FROM ITS LEADERS WHO HAVE SUCCUMB TO THE SICKNESS OF GREED--ITS AN OLD STORY AND THE ONLY CAUSE OF THE FALL OF ANY GREAT SOCIETY--FROM WITHIN

ITS OVER ALREADY--EVERYTHING HAS A BEGINNING AND AN END--IT DINT HAVE TO BE RIGHT NOW AND IN THIS WAY BUT WHATS DONE IS DONE AND CANT BE UNDONE.

THE ONLY WE COULD HOPE TO DO IS DAMAGE CONTROL AT THIS POINT AND TRY TO SHAPE THE FUTURE WE ARE NOW LEFT WITH--BLOOD IS THE ONLY THING THAT WILL HAVE ANY REAL EFFECT.

WHY DONT YOU ACTUALLY RESEARCH IF FREEDOM HAS INCREASED IN THIS COUNTY AND IN THE WORLD OR IF IT HAS DECREASED!!--ARE YOU KIDDING ME WITH THIS QUESTION!!!????

NEVER IN MY LIFE HAVE I SELF CENSORED MYSELF--AND I FEAR FOR WHAT I WRITE

Red gal

Manny

A nice sounding but dangerous lie; that's what it means to me. Certainly, the USA has to be one of the most, if not the most, "free" country in the world but the influence of many special interest groups has gradually, and seriously, compromised our liberties. The very existence of these special interest groups is an ironic proof of the many freedoms that we do enjoy in the United States. Ironic because they are a result of our freedoms and they, in turn, attempt to remove, or limit, freedoms that they have deemed dangerous to their agendas. By the way, my response will be restricted to the concept of "freedom of expression".

Expression has consequences; if it didn't, we probably wouldn't express ourselves. If a baby wants to eat, he instinctually knows that, if he cries, he will probably be fed. Special interest groups do exactly the same thing. They cry whenever their needs, or wants, are not being met by our government. These "needs" pull in many different directions with intent on protecting some while exposing others to harms way. The wealthier the special interest group, the more influential, and the louder, its cry. Unfortunately, their cries, in many occasions, silence the voices of others.

Special interest groups are obviously well acquainted with policy makers, within our government, who can procure the special interest groups' "needs". They, the policy makers, are then handsomely compensated for their efforts by whichever special interest group they have served.

This is nothing new and it's in accord with common human nature. It is also, apparently, perfectly legal. Policy makers would be fools if this wasn't the case. They, for example, create laws that allow donating entities (their specific name escapes me now) to contribute large sums of money to the policy makers' "cause". These donating entities are also designed in a way which conceals its financial sources, representatives, and motives. These entities are just what many special interest groups needed; a straight forward way to anonymously buy your local, senator, congressman, etc.

As a result of all these special interests groups, and greed in the part of our policy makers, the United States has become an extremely sensitive place in which to express oneself. Examples of these sensitivities abound but none will be listed here since I do need my low paying job.

gkello

A friend with benefits.

Campaign contributions. Don't prostitutes call payment for services "gifts" as well?

Legalize prostitution? Actually, just eliminate money from campaign contributions. Make politicians walk the streets where they belong.

Don't get me started!

j. Thomas

It means the citizen has extraordinary freedoms coupled with extraordinary responsibilities. Unfortunately, lots of folks forget the "responsibility" part.

No office should be held more than two terms. Those who are in office for 20-30 years eventually forget they are paid by the public to serve the public.
Entrenched, they make deals which have little public benefit, but lots of personal rewards.

Term limits at all levels of government.
I believe term limits in the NYC Council has brought us lots of new talent and fresh ideas.

I may be naive, but occasionally the press should ignore the shenanigans of fringe groups. It can be an insult to the average citizen (who is rarely recognized) and gives the wrong impression to the citizenry. In other words, "bizarro" i.e. Palin, O'Connell, Snyder . . . are seeded by others but fertilized and grown by the press . . . a lot like the hormone saturated chickens we see in our markets.

Eric

Its a government of laws... where no one, even Dick Cheney, is not above the law. Rights and responsibilites.

The congress and government is 'owned' by corporations. And I think the best and fastest way to restore the system is to eliminate campaign contributions; I know there are some who claim it's a free speech issue and I don't buy this.
I don't believe the concept of legal personhood for corporations is legally valid, but if this concept is left in place, we get Citizens United on steroids.

Pass campaign finance reform with teeth; get the money out of political campaigns, money is not speech. I'd like to see a press that insisted on verifiable researched fact when debating issues and publishing the distortions when they occur.

From a historical perspective, much of what is now considered core American rights and values: women’s suffrage, child labor laws, the 40 hour week, social security, the right to organize labor, Medicare, unemployment benefits, voting rights, a minimum wage, were fought for by Liberals and Progressives and won despite fierce obdurate resistance from Republicans. And yet, inexplicably, it is almost impossible to hear genuine progressive/liberal ideas in the mainstream media. I do not think that the media in this country is 'liberal'; there is no empirical verifiable evidence and yet the mainstream media is so afraid of being pilloried as liberal that they do not contest Right wing polemics that dominate the airwaves. Although one is more likely to hear some progressive ideas on WNYC or NPR, it is not a real counterweight to the Becks, O'Reillys and Coulters of the world.

Publius II

Free to dream about bi-partisanship.

The concept of compromise

We need to market the spirit of compromise for the People's benefit. I'd change the presiential term to a one-year six yr term, provide a budget item for federal election campaign spending (a progressive rate based on office) and eliminate all political contributions, individual or corporate to $1000.

Point and counterpoint from the best minds we can get, whether professional or amateur. For example, take the example of off-shore drilling. WNYC would bring in two experts on the subject and two articulate listeners who debate the issue. The experts can express the facsts and figures while the listeners can express their wishes and concerns.