• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Defund NPR, PBS?

Skeptic Ginger said:
Typical Fox and the right wing attitude. Fox is a biased news company.
Click to expand...
BAWWWWWWWWWWW. Meanwhile every other media outlet is free to report any way they wish.
Skeptic Ginger said:
There is overwhelming evidence of that fact.
Click to expand...
Yawn...
Skeptic Ginger said:
Anyone firing someone who speaks out on Fox is not automatically firing someone with a valid opinion.
Click to expand...
You're makin' me sleepy....
Skeptic Ginger said:
Most of the Fox crew are lying party line toters.
Click to expand...
You're borin' the crap outta me.

Skeptic Ginger said:
Williams was a bit more honest among the staff. But NPR has a legitimate concern with any reporter/news analyst that speaks regularly on a right wing biased broadcast station.
Click to expand...
You're joking, right? If he wasn't there in an official capacity on behalf of NPR why do they care? There's also that "blah blah in no way reflects views and opinions of everyone at etc etc."
Skeptic Ginger said:
It's too bad Williams felt the need to ally himself with Fox.
Click to expand...
Only because you dislike them.
Skeptic Ginger said:
Because right wing political opinons are important to be heard, when they are legitimate and not just lying talking points campaign programs.
Click to expand...
Can I get an injury rolling my eyes?


Skeptic Ginger said:
I donate money to any news source the right wing propagandists try to silence.
Click to expand...
Would you like a medal? Or do you get a super cool tote bag and decoder ring or something?
Skeptic Ginger said:
Fox is a threat to freedom of VALID information.
Click to expand...
Ah, well this will go ignored, naturally, but who are you to determine what information is/is not valid?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
But NPR has a legitimate concern with any reporter/news analyst that speaks regularly on a right wing biased broadcast station.
...
I donate money to any news source the right wing propagandists try to silence.
Click to expand...

Project much? NPR and you have a problem with Williams appearing on Fox, but Fox and its audience never had a problem with Williams being on NPR.
 
quadraginta said:
I've long believed that tax returns should include an assignment section, where people could, if they so desired, itemize what percentage of their taxes they want to be assigned to which government services, and then let Congress allocate funding within those constraints.

At least for a while. After the unintended consequences set in from a general public misunderstanding of how much money is really spent on what things I expect that the fun would quickly be stifled.

Or maybe not. The experiment would certainly be interesting, and with today's data management technology it would be easy enough to implement.
Click to expand...

You could do a preference system, like "I would prefer my taxes fund X", and then fulfill each person's preference until the budget for that program is met and the rest goes into general use, but the overhead would be more expensive. I guess you could put the preference option on the forms and just ignore it; let people believe their tax money is, specifically, being spent how they want it to be.
 
elbe said:
You could do a preference system, like "I would prefer my taxes fund X", and then fulfill each person's preference until the budget for that program is met and the rest goes into general use, but the overhead would be more expensive. I guess you could put the preference option on the forms and just ignore it; let people believe their tax money is, specifically, being spent how they want it to be.
Click to expand...


Nah.

I think they should go all the way. We could put a stop to the endless litany of politicians complaining about how outrageous it is that people are being forced to give their tax dollars for things they don't approve of.

Hard and fast restrictions, with both general categories and some blank spaces for more specific inclusions and exclusions that may not be detailed.

If Congress runs out of money in a certain pot then they have to go back to their various constituencies and explain to them why spending more money on that would be a good idea.

It would bring a whole new meaning to the idea of "accountability".
 
The problem with state media is that it reflexively and obediently supports the government (surprise, surprise). The biggest cheerleaders for the boondoggle, social engineering project in Iraq came from -- you guessed it -- taxpayer funded media. A real democracy, one without a propaganda ministry, keeps that power in private hands to cast a critical eye on the state.

ALSO. Who watches PBS? Relatively rich white people. In fact, they should rename PBS SWPL-TV. This a transfer of tax dollars from Americans to SWPLs. **** Enya, **** you. Those ******** public broadcasting networks need to pay their own way, which may involve -- Allah forbid -- broadcasting a Toby Keith concert.
 
Last edited:
Cain said:
**** public broadcasting networks need to pay their own way, which may involve -- Allah forbid -- broadcasting a Toby Keith concert.
Click to expand...

Would you go for a Merle Haggard documentary? http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/merle-haggard/watch-the-full-film/1605/

There's loads of good stuff on PBS. I especially like the fact that it takes some effort to find what you like. My station carries an excellent modern remake of Sherlock Holmes (by way of the BBC). At an hour and a half an episode (without commercials) I can't see it being as attractive to commercial television. But then again, I'm one of the elite who digs Dr. Who and Antiques Roadshow. I wouldn't mind having a bit more of the 'well off' part in the demographic description though.
 
If you replace George Soros with Rush Limbaugh in the talks about the donated money, I have a suspicion the opinions being expressed would suddenly be much less supportive and far more critical.

Tu quoque I suppose.. But I can't help but feel that some want to really bend over backwards to rationalize something that I just know they wouldn't be comfortable with in the other direction.
 
Whiplash said:
If you replace George Soros with Rush Limbaugh in the talks about the donated money, I have a suspicion the opinions being expressed would suddenly be much less supportive and far more critical.

Tu quoque I suppose.. But I can't help but feel that some want to really bend over backwards to rationalize something that I just know they wouldn't be comfortable with in the other direction.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have a problem with Limbaugh donating to a non-profit. It's a good thing to do.
 
Whiplash said:
If you replace George Soros with Rush Limbaugh in the talks about the donated money, I have a suspicion the opinions being expressed would suddenly be much less supportive and far more critical.

Tu quoque I suppose.. But I can't help but feel that some want to really bend over backwards to rationalize something that I just know they wouldn't be comfortable with in the other direction.
Click to expand...

It's so easy to make unfalsifiable claims and just know you would be right.

On this one page, we have allegations that NPR/PBS are somehow both state run media filled with propaganda AND under the sway of private donators. Tell you what: you guys figure out what kind of boogie man you think is under your bead and then we'll go see if there is any truth to it.
 
Upchurch said:
Yeah, well, I hate paying for a Bush Doctrine war that has cost us way more than NPR or PBS ever has.

Sucks, huh?
Click to expand...

So do I. What does that have to do with it? Two wrongs make a right? BTW, I'm for PBS if you hadn't noticed in the OP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom