Remember that hullabaloo surrounding Juan Williams when he was fired from NPR for saying he got nervous when flying with Islamic-looking males? His exact quote to Fox News’ Bill O’Reily was:

“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

NPR’s Big Boss Lady Vivian Schiller defended the decision to terminate Mr. Williams’s employment with that organization because according to her, “he had several times in the past violated our news code of ethics with things that he had said on other people’s air.”

Well then cool people like S.E. Cupp and Sarah Palin started asking why such an obviously left-wing outfit should receive federal funding (our tax dollars at work!) and calling for NPR to be defunded.

Vivian Schiller called the claim that NPR depends on public funding ‘laughable.’ It’s the parent company (the Corporation for Public Broadcasting) that receives the public funding, while NPR is funded (in part) by station fees. And where do the stations get their funding? From the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Laughable indeed.

Besides, if NPR really didn’t needs public funding, as Ms. Schiller claims, why are they so insistent that the supposed non-existent funding not be cut?

In November, the House GOP moved to defund NPR. It was defeated, and supporters of the bill were mocked as petty and juvenile. NPR released a statement saying:

“In an increasingly fractious media environment, public radio’s value in fostering an informed society has never been more critical. Our growing audience shows that we are meeting that need. It is imperative for federal funding to continue to ensure that this essential tool of democracy remains available to all Americans and thrives well into the future.”

Basically, NPR is claiming to be an unbiased, reliable source of information for all Americans.

On a completely unrelated note, I saw a lot of people mentioning WikiLeaks on Twitter this morning, in relation to Amazon. I wondered to myself: what does WikiLeaks have to do with Amazon? And I skipped on over to Google to figure it out. Here’s what NPR had to say about the situation:

The WikiLeaks website has left its U.S. Web host, Amazon.com, and moved back to a Swedish provider.

Amazon.com would not comment on its relationship with WikiLeaks or whether it forced the site to leave. Messages seeking comment from WikiLeaks were not returned.

Here’s what actually happened, according to oh, um, actual facts: Amazon cut ties with WikiLeaks and slimey Julian Assange after the website leaked over a quarter of a million classified state documents, causing a global scandal, embarrassment for many world leaders, and potential danger for countless innocents around the world.

Amazon told Congressman Joe Leiberman (chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee) about the decision to break with WikiLeaks.

“This morning Amazon informed my staff that it has ceased to host the WikiLeaks website,” Liberman said in a public statement. ”The company’s decision to cut off WikiLeaks now is the right decision and should set the standard for other companies WikiLeaks is using to distribute its illegally seized material.”

Even WikiLeaks itself whined about being ousted on Twitter.

Amazon absolutely made a good decision in booting the wretched WikiLeaks from its servers. Bravo, Amazon!

Shame on NPR for not even trying to get its facts straight. Unbiased my left foot. Bottom line: If NPR is going to promote left-wing propaganda, they can do it on their own dime.