Skip to comments.NPR Launches Offensive Against Congressman Trying to Cut Its Public Funding
Posted on 01/13/2011 5:05:39 PM PST by Sub-Driver
NPR Launches Offensive Against Congressman Trying to Cut Its Public Funding
published January 13, 2011 | FoxNews.com
National Public Radio is accusing Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., who is leading a Republican charge to cut public funding to the broadcaster, of trying to stifle free speech, a move that puts the embattled network on the offense as it fights fallout from its decision to fire Fox News contributor Juan Williams.
Lamborn immediately fired back, saying the whole point of not funding NPR is to enhance competition and viewpoints.
The tit-for-tat comes just a week after the NPR news editor who fired Williams resigned as the network's board of directors completed its independent review of the dismissal. The directors recommended new internal procedures for personnel decisions and disciplinary action, and cancelled NPR CEO Vivian Schiller's annual bonus because of "concern over her role in the termination process."
Lamborn first introduced his NPR defunding legislation in June, but it didn't receive much attention until the network fired Williams in October over remarks he made on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor" about his anxiety over seeing people dressed as Muslims on airplanes.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I thought NPR was supposed to be neutral....even about their public financing.
Yep. They should just increase their private donations from fellow liberals.
No more money for you. We’re broke. Go find a new career on blogspot.
It’ll be free speech once we’re done paying for it.
The crew at NPR can spew whatever stupidity they desire,but they need to do it on their own dime.
The government has no business funding things like NPR and Planned Parenthood and ACORN
Amazing to me that “free” speech now means getting government subsidies. I guess NPR is taking the phrase literally. Foolish me. I thought free speech meant freedom to speak without interference from government.
Of course, I can’t blame NPR for trying to keep the $ coming, because they certainly aren’t the first in line for government cheese, so to speak. We live in a land where special interests squabble for government monies like children fighting over pinata candy. Sad to say, not entering the fray is a good way to put yourself or your company at a distinct disadvantage.
What part of the Constitution allows the government to fund left wing (actually, any) communication agencies?
I guess even limp-wristed, bed-wetting liberals fight when their backs are against the wall.
NPR can badmouth this guy and lie and spread rumors all day long and it won’t matter. Only 20 people total listen to them.
They are being defunded whether they like it or not and no one is going to ride in to save them. No one cares anymore. Bye bye Nina Tottenberg.
Free speech isn’t free when the tax payers have to pay for it.
Money for nothing and your checks for free.
Got them in your sights, NPR?
Or maybe you’re ready to hit them with both barrels?
Or are you targeting them for defeat?
NPR is a perfect example of one political bias completely capturing a “public institution” - nearly always allowing the domination of one political bias in that institution and what it produces - and, then in the highest form of hypocrisy claiming it is fighting for “free speech”.
NPR should be de-funded 100% because it does not operate in “the public interest”; it operates predominately in the interests of the political Left, period.
NPR should be de-funded 100% because GOVERNMENT has no business owning, funding or operating ANY media operation. Allowing such an operation and advocating for a “free press” simply expresses an oxymoron.
The corollary to this issue is that “foreign correspondents” for any foreign government-owned media should be sent home and U.S. “work visas” for such people should be denied. If their governments want to ask U.S. officials something, we have a state department for that. If their citizens want to ask something or find “U,S” news and information, they can check out what any private media offers (from their country, the U.S. or anywhere), or sit dumbly and take the word of their governments’ media (which in some cases is all they have).
Yes, I know, that would mean the BBC would have to close down its U.S. operations. Oh, boo hoo, boo hoo!!!
I’m afraid that’s about the size of things. Think we could corral the leftists in NYC and L.A.? It’s a shame we won’t have Isaac Hayes to run NYC though.
“I guess even limp-wristed, bed-wetting liberals fight when their backs are against the wall.”
But you can still count on them to fight like girls with a lot of groin-kicking, scratching and eye-gouging, LOL!
DEFUND NPR & PBS!
(Note: My employer pulled all funds from our local WPR years ago. He disagreed with their gay-friendly agenda, so we no longer do the spring expo or advertise on the local stations at all. I KNEW I joined the right company way back when! Oh those evil, EVIL White Christian Men who have all the money, LOL!)
If your product is THAT GOOD, consumers will beat a path to your door. If it’s NOT that good, then TAXPAYERS need to fund it? I. Think. Not. *SPIT*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.