[La Lydia]

Juan makes the case perfectly, and he is in a perfect position to make it. I know some people don't like him, but these arguments are beyond reproach.

[GeronL]

state and local governments should also stop funding PBS and Planned Parenthood.

[JustSurrounded]

As usual, it's all noise. If all fed/state/local funds were pulled, they'd see a budget cut of 5.8%. And what's the federal piece? I read somewhere it was about 2%. So much furor ... federal defunding in no way amounts to a dealth blow.

[hosepipe]

Nothing NPR does is beneficial.. else Soros wouldn't fund it..
NPR would not hire you if were a beneficial asset to America..

This fits Juan Williams exactly.. an affirmative action journalist..
Juan is/was so dumb he thought that NPR was fair and balanced..
else why did he NOT quit himself.. unless he could care less.. about fairness..
Because an idiot can see they are not balanced..

O'Really carrying water for Williams speaks more against O'Really than it does for Williams..
Williams is blind to Obamas flaws.. willfully blind..
and O'Really can't see well either..

[Robert357]

+1

I am sure that those in the buggy whip industry also thought it was important to keep that industry going, even if technology had passed it by.

Once upon a time, when I could only get 3 TV channels and 2 or 3 non-short wave radio channels on the radio, NPR and the National Broadcast Service were created to provide commercial free and educational programing.

However, over time I can now watch over 100 TV channels and get over cable/Internet thousands of live and streaming radio-type shows.

There is nothing that NPR (or its TV affiliate) does with taxpayer money that couldn't be done by other funding means.

It is time to use taxpayer money for more important things, especially, because NPR has taken on an elite ideological bend, but also because technology has passed it by.

[OrangeHoof]

Since Juan invokes Limbaugh’s name, I wonder if Rush will mention this column? He’s been very quiet about the defunding issue although, in the past, he has lamented - as have many - that broadcasters receive any type of tax-supported funding.

[flowerplough]

” ...we unwittingly(?) cultivated a core audience that is predominately white, liberal, highly educated, elite. “Super-serve the core” — that was the mantra, for many, many years. This focus has, in large part, brought us to our success today. It was never anyone’s intention to exclude anyone.

But we have to accept — unapologetically — that this is the franchise we’ve built.

We have to look at this because the criticisms that are coming at us — whether they’re couched in other things — do have some legitimacy. We must, as a starting point, take on board some of this criticism. Before we can set a path, we have to own this.

One choice, at this transformational moment, is to say, “We are satisfied with what we are doing. We — in radio — are providing 11 percent of America with an extraordinary service.” If this is our choice, we need to carefully consider whether we warrant public funding and, if so, what the rationale would be.”

Feb. 25 by Sue Schardt, executive director of the Association of Independents in Radio (AIR). http://www.current.org/audience/aud1105schardt.html

[End Times Sentinel]

I know some people don't like him, but these arguments are beyond reproach.

Like him or don't like him, an intellectually honest person will admit that he's correct.