When I first heard about Armstrong Williams and the payments, I criticized the ordeal. Williams know he was wrong, and he has stated it. At the very least, he should have disclosed that he had been paid to speak on behalf of a government policy. By not doing so, he hurt other minorities that were involved within the political spectrum. Tribune had every right to cancel Williams's column with them on the failure to disclose that information, and if TV One cancels his show on their network and America's Black Forum asks Williams to leave, it's simply the consequences of his actions.
But let's not get this twisted; Williams wasn't trying to sully conservatives or trying to kill the conservative movement with this incident. He didn't have an axe to grind by doing this, and since he's human, he does make mistakes. It seems to me as if people are trying to use this incident to go into shark mode at the first drop of blood hitting the water.
It would help a few people, before they go on tirades about Williams's behavior, to recall any mistakes made in their life. I'm sure all can think of a few. The man has apologized, and it's not as if he has a history of such behavior. It's time to break up the posse and move on.
Besides, Williams has a lot more to worry about than a bunch of talking heads throwing down indignation from up high. As Lartigue said, that $240K will come in handy. (I also agreed with Lartigue that his arguments were indeed lightweight, and I felt he was the black conservative whipping boy for the left from way back. The black equivalent of Tucker Carlson, if you will.)
I listened to Limbaugh today, and there were several things that really struck home with me. Here's one of them:
The same could be asked about conservative pundits, too. Are you mad because of the ethics, or the money? How many pundits consort and hobnob with Republican politicans, and other pundits? How many get invited to cruises, or get lucrative speaking engagements?Folks, stick with me here. Principal journalists don't get $250,000 from government agencies to go out and promote what they're talking about, but then again Armstrong Williams doesn't get countless invitations to all the A-list cocktail parties where he can eat for nothing and drink for nothing and hobnob and hang around with all these people. What's the dollar value of becoming close friends with all your sources? What's the dollar value if you're a liberal journalist to being invited to all the right places and get to meet all the rightly people learn all the right spin, given all the right stuff to go out and spread the news in your own way? What's the difference? The difference is, that ostensibly isn't coming from government, the 240 grand for Armstrong Williams came from government.
Now, he's apologized, and that was a proper thing to do. But as I say, go back to the top of the question: What are they really upset about? Are they upset about the ethics of Armstrong Williams or are they upset about the money? Because I will bet you a dollar to a doughnut that Armstrong Williams would not shill for Hillary Clinton for all the money in the world. But how many of his critics would. How many of his critics do? How many of his critics out there shilling for the Clintons, shilling for Hillary no matter what they know; no matter who they know it from, no matter what they know to be the truth. How many of these people out there shilling for Bill Burkett? How many people shilling for all these Bush enemies from his Texas days, trying to get him on this National Guard story? How many people in the media shilling for things? One thing I know about Armstrong Williams: He's not going to shill for something he doesn't believe in. But I can't say that about the other guys.
Does anyone recall the same criticism levied during the election period, when a Boston Globe reporter wrote an article saying a Swiftboat Vet had recanted his accusations against John Kerry, all the time while covering the Kerry campaign for the paper and writing the forward for the initial book for the Kerry campaign. He had been covering John Kerry for years, and this book was one of the perks of doing so. So let's not act as if it's something new or shocking. Plenty of people get perks from the people they cover and network with as a result of being a pundit or a journalist.
But hey, maybe it's just me. I see the amount of indignation shown towards Williams - a bit of it in a self-righteous tone - and then I think, "If I was in the same situation, would they do that to me?" It's the ole "kick em while they're down" approach. The one thing Armstrong Williams will definitely learn from this incident is the people who are truly his friends and colleagues and who aren't.
UPDATE: A very good post by Jeremy Pierce at Parableman. There has indeed been some misconceptions going around about this whole scenario.