In his November 1 op-ed for The Hill, Fox News Analyst Juan Williams claimed that the “parents’ rights’ mantra in the Virginia gubernatorial elections is simply “a code for white race politics.” To the contrary, this really is about parents’ rights and about what is best for all children. To inject charges of white supremacy and racism is to miss the whole point of why so many parents are so upset. In all candor and with due respect, I would have expected better from Mr. Williams.

The fact is that these parents are concerned with the injection of racism into every phase of their children’s education, not to mention the injection of an extreme LGBTQ agenda. Williams should be standing with these parents, not against them. With reference to campaigning strategies in the 2018 elections, he wrote,

“Virginia Republicans are back with a new and improved ‘Culture Wars’ campaign for 2021. The closing argument is once again full of racial division — but this time it is dressed up as a defense of little children.”

Specifically, he claimed that,

“It is a campaign to stop classroom discussion of Black Lives Matter protests or slavery because it could upset some children, especially white children who might feel guilt.”

To the contrary, every white Christian parent with whom I have interacted wants their children to know the truth about slavery, segregation, and the lasting effects of those sinful institutions. And they want to see equal opportunities for all.

But they do not want their children thinking they are evil because they are white (this is actually happening). And they do not want their children to feel guilty for having a nice home or good educational opportunities, as if all success of all white Americans was built on the shoulders of slaves. In the words of former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice,

“The way we’re talking about race is that it either seems so big that somehow white people now have to feel guilty for everything that happened in the past.”

Most of all, these parents do not want everything to be about race, to the point that math can be seen as racist. Or that famous European poets and historians are cancelled because of their whiteness.

Remarkably, to make his case, Williams repeats the “very fine people” lie, writing, “Recall, it was Trump who famously said there were ‘very fine people’ on both sides of the violence sparked by ‘Unite the Right,’ the 2017 rally of white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va.”

Surely Williams must know that this has been debunked time and time again. But why let a good lie die? He also claims that,

“Critical race theory — broadly, a focus on racial disparities as a fact of American life — is not explicitly taught in Virginia’s public schools or anywhere in American public schools. But Republicans nationwide have made it a boogeyman to excite racial divisions and get their base to the polls.”

To be sure, there are different ways to define CRT. For some, it is healthy, positive, and objective. For others, it is unhealthy, negative, and biased. So, before we debate CRT, it’s important to ask, “What, exactly, do you mean by the term?”

And clearly, CRT in its full-blown, academic form, is not being taught to kids in Virginia (and elsewhere). But are classes taught through the lens of CRT? Without question.

As a Daily Wire headline announced on October 31, “Terry McAuliffe Claims CRT Has ‘Never Been’ In Virginia Schools. His Administration Pushed It, Documents Show.” The documentation is clear and undeniable.

Yet Williams approvingly cites McAuliffe, who said, “[Gubernatorial candidate Glenn] Youngkin’s closing message of book banning and silencing esteemed Black authors is a racist dog whistle designed to gin up support from the most extreme elements of his party — mainly his top endorser and surrogate, Donald Trump.”

To the contrary, it is authors with extremist views that are under scrutiny, or, at the least, authors whose views are being exploited by educators with extremist agendas, while contrary views are rejected and banned. (As an aside, but for the record, Youngkin largely campaigned as himself and for himself, not as an extension of Trump, as other political commentators have noted.)

To be clear, I would not deny that white racism remains an issue for some (perhaps many?) families in Virginia. Nor would I deny that some of them would prefer that the full truth about slavery and its legacy not be taught in schools. May they have a change of heart, may they face the facts, and may they enlighten their children. There is no place for white supremacy anywhere and at any time.

Unfortunately, Williams is guilty of a reverse racism, one that projects all kind of nefarious motives on to parents who really do care and who really want their kids to get a solid education rather than cultural brainwashing. In that spirit, I recently tweeted,

“The solution to anti-black racism is not anti-white racism (or anti-Asian racism, etc.). Instead, it is cultivating mutual understanding, respect, and love, with a real desire to see others thrive and enjoy the best of what America has to offer.”

Mr. Williams, I invite you to step higher with me so that, together, we could advance that mutual understanding, respect, and love – based on truth – rather than engage in an endless game of biased and racially charged sniping.

Surely America in 2021 deserves better.

This article was originally posted at AskDrBrown.org.

The flap over the firing of Juan Williams as a news analyst for National Public Radio (NPR) has created a firestorm of controversy. Williams supposedly violated NPR’s policy regarding interjecting personal commentary while reporting on the news. As a political commentator to the FOX News Channel (FNC), Williams, in essence, stated he gets nervous when he sees individuals wearing “Muslim garb” present in an airplane he is traveling on. Though Williams’ comments might have been politically incorrect, he was simply stating how he feels and how other Americans react in a similar situation.

NPR’s CEO, Vivian Schiller, fired Williams during a phone call and later went on to make public statements questioning Williams’ sanity, suggesting the commentator see a psychiatrist. Schiller later publicly apologized for how she handled the firing of Williams, including her statement questioning Williams’ mental health. However, the situation has thrown gasoline on an issue regarding whether NPR and its sister entity PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) should be on the public dole.

I rarely agree with the political views held by Mr. Williams. He is a staunch advocate for liberalism, including support of abortion on demand, homosexual “marriage” and other political views which are contrary to the pro-family agenda. However, even those on the far left agree that Williams was a victim of political correctness run amuck. Clearly, other NPR contributing journalists, including Nina Totenberg, NPR’s legal affairs correspondent and Cokie Roberts, NPR’s senior news analyst, frequently voice their opinions on political and social issues during appearances on networks other than NPR.

But here is what most reasonable Americans agree on: Juan Williams is also employed by what is perceived as the mortal enemy of the progressive movement in the United States…FOX News. Therefore, NPR’s Schiller applied a double standard in the firing of Williams and did so by interpreting what served her agenda regarding a technical aspect of Williams’ contract.

More important, the Williams’ controversy has brought to the forefront whether National Public Radio or PBS should receive any taxpayer dollars. Only 2% of NPR’s operating costs derive from taxpayers. The combined budget of PBS and NPR is not chump change. The revenue they receive for radio and television from American taxpayers each year totals nearly $420 million. To put this figure into perspective, the new health care law cuts the Medicare budget by $500 million over the next ten years. The annual budget for Medicare is $500 million. The operative question is: What is more important to the majority of the American people, the support of NPR and PBS or the health care for seniors, disabled, widows, widowers and their dependents?

NPR and PBS do not reflect the values of all Americans. NPR and PBS do not report in a fair and balanced manner. Their journalists report the news from a liberal perspective. The commentaries on NPR and PBS never reflect the pro-family viewpoint, but many are led to believe that without the support of taxpayer dollars, NPR and PBS would no longer exist.

Besides being on the public dole, NPR and PBS receive huge amounts of cash from liberal foundations and individuals, including billionaire George Soros who recently contributed $1.8 million to hire 100 reporters (two for each of the fifty state capitols in the United States). These reporters would be assigned to cover state legislatures for NPR. Soros is a major contributor to many far left radical causes. He is the Founder and primary funder of groups like MoveOn.org and Media Matters, two Internet websites which advance the far left political agenda in America. Soros’ political agenda includes the eventual move to socialized health care in America and he believes the United States is not served well by its free market economy and capitalism in general. Anyone who believes there would not be strings attached to Soros’ contribution to public broadcasting is, at best, naive.

But there is a little known fact regarding NPR and PBS which is connected with its programming. Many conservatives have long argued that NPR and PBS should not receive taxpayer dollars. The response from supporters of public television and public radio argue that programming like Sesame Street would disappear without taxpayer money. Nothing could be further from the truth. Go into any store that sells toys this Christmas and check out how many products are licensed by PBS. There is literally an army of high-priced lawyers who protect the licensing rights of Sesame Street products alone–which include Elmo, Ernie, Big Bird, Abby Cadabby, Zoe and Cookie Monster, to mention just some of the merchandizing which generates hundreds of millions of dollars for public television annually.

Subsequently, the firing of Juan Williams provided a service to the nation by exposing NPR and PBS to further scrutiny, not only concerning their liberal political content from a journalistic perspective, but whether nearly a half billion dollars of taxpayer money can be better spent.