Posted on 01/14/2011 5:07:48 PM PST by jazusamo
One of the first orders of business for the new Congress is to defund public broadcasting. Last week, Rep. Doug Lamborn, Colorado Republican, introduced legislation to do just that. He immediately came under fire from National Public Radio (NPR) for his "intrusion into the programming decision-making of America's public radio stations." To hear the taxpayer-subsidized broadcast suits talk, it's as though Mr. Lamborn was attacking the First Amendment itself.
National Public Radio claims taking away federal money "would ultimately dictate the daily editorial schedules and news programs of nearly 1,000 public radio stations across America." This argument is inconsistent and unsupportable. Cutting ties to federal funds would if anything give NPR unlimited editorial freedom with no worries about government oversight. They could fire even more thoughtful people like Juan Williams without consequence, assuming there are any moderate voices still remaining in the left-leaning organization.
Partisans of public broadcasting assert that taxpayer cash is necessary for the system to survive, but NPR President Vivian Schiller contends only 3 percent of her budget comes from the government. Such a miniscule cutback in hard economic times certainly should be in keeping with the public-service mandate NPR purports to pursue. It cannot simultaneously be true that the federal government supplies only a pittance of NPR funding but that such "draconian" cuts would put them out of business. If nothing else, public broadcasting needs to get its talking points straight.
~snip~
The bottom line is America doesn't need public broadcasting and no longer can afford it. The First Amendment guarantees a free press, not a left-wing free ride.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Exactly right. Some of us should put out money where our mouths are - and give to the Congressman’s war chest.
bump
NPR is an arm of the Democrat Party. When it comes to news and politics it is strictly liberal.
NPR is an arm of the Democrat Party. When it comes to news and politics it is strictly liberal.
Y-e-e-s-s-s-s!
There is no right to subsidized radio or tv programming.
There is no vital national interest in keeping these programs going.
Most peoples’ daily lives will go on just fine without them.
If they are of real value to people private companies can pick them up and see if they can survive in the marketplace just like any other shows on radio and tv.
It’s only a civil way of doing business. They can find their own paying customers.
Well said! It’s time to put an end to subsidizing radio and tv with taxpayer monies no matter the programming, the same can be found elsewhere.
Can’t happen soon enough. I’ve listened to NPR’s Morning Edition, Weekend Edition, and All Things Considered for years; I live far enough out in the woods that AM talk just can’t dependably reach a moving car. I’ve heard ‘em all insult me, belittle me, assist their favored interviewees with leading questions and hints, and refuse to ask so-obvious followup questions. Their “in good standing” Nina Totenburg’s wish that a Senator’s grandchildren acquire AIDS rankles that much more these post-Juan-Williams days, too. And they’re doing it all with some of my tax money in their god-damned pockets!
I listen to public radio in “know your enemies” mode, and as Obama did with el Hispanico/as, I say to Republicans and conservatives in Congress, if we’re in this together, “we’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us.”
p.s. This, too, from NPR’s Daisy Hernandez on Arizona: “It’s safe to say there was a collective sigh of brown relief when the Tucson killer turned out to be a gringo.” http://www.npr.org/2011/01/12/132865098/in-tucson-a-sigh-of-relief-from-latino-community
This is exactly right. The mere idea of a government funded “news” organ is repugnant to the Republic.
I read about Daisy Hernandez saying that. It’s mind blowing that someone would say that on the radio, especially taxpayer subsidized radio. Had a white conservative said something like that the uproar would have been huge, it’s flat out racist.
While we are at it, we should do away with the ad council and “public service” ads. They have become almost entirely a means of promoting “progressive” propaganda.
I agree, but you can bet the propaganda is going to increase for at least two more years.
“NPR President Vivian Schiller contends only 3 percent of her budget comes from the government”
Sounds like we’re all agreed then! You’re on your own sweetheart. (gavel bangs)
Next item on the agenda: the National Endowment for the Arts ... and we should be able to squeeze in the Depts. of Energy & Education and the EPA before quittin’ time.
That’s right - those producing nature shows for example can easily find a market on the many nature and learning type channels on cable.
Antiques Roadshow can go on HGTV etc.
Defunding National Pubic Radio, the yeasty, smelly crotch of liberalism, is soooo overdue.
I like your plan, especially Energy, Education and EPA. We’d save big money and at the same time strike a blow against socialism in government.
Axe subsidized broadcasting???????????? Like the NPR? Good deal, great idea.
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.