re: #134 Dark_Falcon

I think it was the right call by NPR: They needed to keep their funding and donations and she had become an impediment to doing that. The last time NPR seriously tried conclusions with the right, they found themselves defeated with two of their top executives ended up resigning. They could not win, so they acquiesced.

Again, ‘fair to the individual’ does not enter into it. It’s about the organization and its money.

Your avoidance of any ethical or moral statement is noted.

However, you have no evidence to suggest that funding or donations were jeopardised, just an assertion. An assertion that makes no sense, since no action that NPR could take would prevent cult Congressmen from trying to defund it, or prevent cult media from attacking it. Furthermore, it is highly doubtful that anyone currently donating to NPR would change their mind because of an accusation from the cult media.

So your opinion becomes essentially that it’s ‘right’ because the right thing for NPR to do is acquiesce when attacked by cult media, in the vain hope that the attacks might stop.

On the bright side, that’s not the most unethical position you’ve taken today.