In a commentary on AMERICAblog, contributor John Aravosis takes his stance on the recent controversy NPR has gotten itself into that has resulted in the resignation of CEO Vivian Schiller on Wednesday. The decision made by NPR's board of directors followed a leaked video in which NPR executive Ron Schiller stated he believes that the Tea Party is full of "racist, racist people" and that the Republican party appeals to a largely uneducated American population.Most agree that his most damaging statement however was that NPR would do better in the long-run if federal funding was cut. Congressional Republicans are now using this statement as additional fodder in their continued effort to cut federal funding for public broadcast, among other federal social services.
The commentary's author is obviously speaking to a like-minded, liberal audience. He argues that NPR's surprisingly swift response meant that NPR was caving to powerful conservatives after this and a similarly humiliating controversy from the organization several months ago. He states that this is a common tactic in the "Democratic playbook", and that rolling over to Conservative demands is only a sign of weakness that will inevitably incite them to further condemn Democrats and liberals in the future. The author cites an unnamed Democratic Senator during the Bush era who admitted that Democrats were signing onto "unconscionable Bush legislation" so that Conservatives would not accuse them of "siding with Osama bin Laden." I have recognized that this same power play is being acted out in the struggle between Congressional Democrats, who have now agreed to four billion dollars worth of funding cuts, and Republicans who now say they require additional cuts or they will block the move to increase the government's debt ceiling. It seems that this is a credible argument by the author and it represents the looming partisan battles that are now debilitating our democracy.
