It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House Votes to Cut Funding for NPR/PBS

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
How can we make good decisions without good information?


Thank you wyrdeone. How do you plan to ever make a decision if you don't know anything behind it? Media like CNN and Fox are stations I simply don't trust with the truth. They are full of this democratic and republican bias to get people worked up and take sides when theres really only one side. NPR doesn't take sides(usually) nor does PBS, and that goes against the "left-right fight" agenda.




posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I disagree. Information is not a luxury, it's the philosopher's stone of survival.

Well, that would be a valid argument if I had said information was a luxury. But I never said or implied that.


How can we make good decisions without good information?

The best retort I have for that is, NPR is not the only news source availabe. It is only one of hundreds, maybe thousands, available to us. Almost all free, btw.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Think about the dollar amount being cut. $100 million. That's $2 million per state, per year. Here in the Boston area, they can make that up in a single weekend of telethons.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
NPR could appeal to a wider audience if it were more balanced in it's reporting. An example follows:

BBC and NPR lead biased leftist media in anti-Israel reporting

Of course a nationalist newspaper representing Israel will claim bias when someone doesn't agree with them. Hey look, you can even buy a "I Support Israel" mug off that website, isn't that nice.

For that matter, anyone can be called bias. NPR is by far one of the least biased sources of news and its listeners have regularly been ranked as some of the most informed. I would even say NPR is a little on the right-wing side. NPR sure isn't left-wing out here in Kansas. I don't know how it is in other places right now though.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by Jamuhn]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Gotta come up with money for the corporate giveaways somehow.

Oh well, I'll just have to give more at my next pledge drive. Maybe up from 25 to 50 this time. They can keep the tote bag.

-O



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 08:08 PM
link   
In a perect world we could have NPR, CPB and PBS

... and The President, his cabinet, both houses, the Military "leaders" and the Republican and Democratic Party Elite would all disappear in a puff of smoke for all their crimes.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

The subcommittee had to decide, he said, on cutting money for public broadcasting or cutting college grants, special education, worker retraining and health care programs. "No one's out to get" public broadcasting, Regula said. "It's not punitive in any way."


Which of those programs would you cut, if you were the decision maker?


They cut both...

Report: Congress cuts $12.7 billion from federal student-loan programs.

money.cnn.com...

Don't let their excuse fool you. It's not deciding between education and NPR as they say, as you can see, they have already been busy cutting plenty from education. The government has spent trillions on the war on Iraq and the war on "terra'rism" and now they have to make up for it.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 08:41 PM
link   
I have mixed feelings about this.
Part of me thinks it is NOT the federal government's job to provide media outlets such as NPR and PBS. It's not that it is so much a luxury as it is not the job I pay my Federal government to do.

Let the private sector continue to provide grants for quality programs.
With all the cable access around, there should be plenty of spots for good programming.
For profit media outlets should be encouraged to provide the kind of programming that is/was NPR and PBS. It shouldn't always be all about the bottom line.



The other part of me thinks, what the hell, there is already so much greed and corruption in government, what's a few more million improperly spent, why shouldn't PBS and NPR be allowed to stay.
Sad commentary, that.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 08:58 PM
link   
The republicans trying to cut funding to NPR is really just class warfare.

They are attacking the sources of culture that the upper-middle class consumes.

These statistics

show that 41% of NPRs listeners own either common or preferred stocks. Almost all of them use computers, and travel internationally. Most of them also work as managers, and have an mean household income of $89,000.

Congress attacking PBS in a sort of perverse populism. Designed to silence people with education or social leadership.

Its not like they are taking professional wrestling off the air or something.

The Congressional attack on the information source used by these people is revenge for them not supporting the neocon agenda. The republicans WANT people to be ignorant, poor, and uninformed, and removing PBS is one more way to shut down all voice of dissent.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Which of those programs would you cut, if you were the decision maker?


I'd cut the 200 billion dollar plus Iraq war, which has created no tangible results for American citizens besides dead friends and family members. Well actually I take that back, it has produced some beneficial results...to Halliburton shareholders.

Or I'd repeal Bush's tax cuts to the rich. Or reinstate the estate tax who's repeal will cost 290 billion dollars over the next ten years, or the dividend tax which will cost 500 billion dollars over the next ten years.

Or stop giving the oil companies 60 billion dollars a year in subsidies when they are having record profits and that money is simply going from the pockets of taxpayers to the pockets of oil company shareholders.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by ShakyaHeir]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Once again, our children suffer for the greed of those in power. Where is this money going to go? More money for war to kill the children whose education we are destroying? This is absolutely ridiculous. It looks to me almost like blackmail. Show what we want you to show or you lose our money. I guess the CPB can take the P out of its name now.


Pay for your own kids brainwashing, I'm trying to raise a couple of my own without your interference!!!!

Why should I pay taxes to tell me why my govt is good? If they told you the war in Iraq was a good thing, still for govt. indoctrination? I thought so, probably over your head.

Hey look the sky is pink!!!



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:27 PM
link   
apparently notbuyinit you have never actually listened to either? They in no way are propoganda. Im less trusting of the private media then the government media by far. It is technically one in the same, but we get to have a much closer eye on government owned. Corporations feeding us our news is nothing bad trouble.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:33 PM
link   
"The United States is a capitalist culture, why would there be a public broadcast anyway that can justify its existence without making a profit."

As for capitalist how about fascist greedy culture...

Profits hmm how about the education and development of young minds in the USA. You make a profit but not one in the sense of monetary gain.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:37 PM
link   
At work I listen to NPR regularly. I can safely say they are at least as leftwing and anti-administration as CNN. For example today they had Robert Redford and another leftist from some Apollo initiative. This group (like many leftwing groups) tried to hide their true intentions by saying they were a group "for energy independence for America". Well that sounds all well and good but what they DON'T say is they are really radical environmentalists and liberals that have nothing more than an Anti-Bush agenda. It was laughable. Redford himself was asked what got him involved in environmental campaigns. He said something about attending some conference in 1973 that opened his eyes. He then went on to bash Bush for not doing anything about it. Hello!? McFly? I have news for you, there have been 3 democrat administrations since 1973 not to mention the democrats held both house and senate for the majority of that time frame. Why do they get a pass if it has been an issue for you since 1973!? Well because the only template these mental midgets work from is Bush-Hate. It blinds them and is their only motivation. No wonder they look like fools.

Here is the website: home.ourfuture.org...

There was no balance, no hard questions as to if their core belief is energy independence, why are they against domestic drilling and fuel discovery?

This is just one example. NPR is leftwing and anti-republican. The republicans control the house, senate, and executive office and represent the majority of the voters in this country. Why would they continue to fund an organization that is nothing more than a slander and disinformation arm of the democrat party? It's like paying for the campaign commercials of your opponents. If the programming is so good, let it compete in the free market (where it would undoubtedly fail). Whenever questions are raised about political balance on NPR, the liberal thought police got up in arms to protect their status quo.

newsbusters.org...
www.mediaresearch.org...

Do you think if democrats controlled things they would fund Rush Limbaugh? It's the exact same scenario.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by Apoc]

[edit on 12-6-2006 by Apoc]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
The republicans control the house, senate, and executive office and represent the majority of the voters in this country.


You're from what country again? I believe that the last Election Results were intentionally hijacked by many Republican Party Officers and Election Officials.

Fact, not fiction.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:52 PM
link   
I have listened to NPR news for years and NPR brodcasting. I find it to be the most un-biased news source out there. After reading news mags. and watching 24hr news networks I find that the plain and simple radio with NPR does the best trick for free. Not to mention all the fun programs that are only played on NPR like:

A Prarie Home Companion


Car Talk

This American Life

Wait Wait Don't Tell Me

NPR World of Opera

American Roots

and

St. Paul Sunday

But I think that the scrpit from an old "Prarie home companion" skit sums it up.

(and the link so you can listen to it to see just how fun the show is. you need real player)

This was from a skit on Saturday, June 25, 2005 when they tried to do this last year.



.... And of course you have a good car radio where you can find heavy metal and hip hop, and heavy metal, and head banger music, and head-banger talk radio TR: "My friends, what is going on in Washington with this pitiful tiny minority of liberals who are standing in the feed trough and preventing ETC ETC" , and you have hip hop, and then you have public radio — a world of excitement and wonder , a world of opera and poetry, and news from all over the world and Car Talk (TR: "A Dodge Dart?? Did you say a Dodge Dart??? TWO GUYS SHRILL LAUGHTER) and all sorts of radio shows that are like having a good friend in the car with you. ("This is Terry Gross with Fresh Air — My guest today is you, yes, you. We'll be talking with you about your new book. You haven't written a book? Well, you should!" ) And last week the U.S. House of Representatives voted to cut funding for public broadcasting. Barney was crying. BARNEY: "This is it. I'm taking the gloves off." The Cookie Monster was upset. COOKIE MONSTER: "That's it for you Congress. No more free trips" Not to mention Linda Wertheimer. LINDA:" No more mugs or tote bags, either." And a few days ago, after a public uproar, Congress voted not to cut the funding after all. Congress realized that when your approval rating is sitting around 19%, you should be careful. Louis the 16th's approval ratings were 26% and remember what happened to him (GUILLLOTINE)

Public radio. It makes the world a little better. (CHOPIN PIANO) A message in the public interest.


If you wish to hear the skit listen HERE

-Mizar Supporting public brodcasting and comerical free classical music.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
At work I listen to NPR regularly. I can safely say they are at least as leftwing and anti-administration as CNN. For example today they had Robert Redford and another leftist from some Apollo initiative.


Weird, because a lot of times I listen to it they have some government official talking about why the spy program is necessary and talking about how much terrorism is hurting America.

NPR heavily functions at the local level and therefore it is no surprise that depending on what market you are in, you will get news tailored to your region's voice. Whereabouts do you live if you don't mind me asking?

Maybe the fact that they have such diverse voices on their station shows how unbiased they truly are.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by Jamuhn]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Apoc
This group (like many leftwing groups) tried to hide their true intentions by saying they were a group "for energy independence for America". Well that sounds all well and good but what they DON'T say is they are really radical environmentalists and liberals that have nothing more than an Anti-Bush agenda...

There was no balance, no hard questions as to if their core belief is energy independence, why are they against domestic drilling and fuel discovery?


Well, because domestic drilling and fuel discovery is not energy independence. Simply supplementing the oil that we buy from opec with the oil that we drill is not going to make us independent, it's just going to trash our environment for a few decades of slightly lower gas prices.

True energy independence would be utilizing our farmland to grow corn and sugarcane so that we can make ethanol to use instead of gasoline. The byproducts of ethanol are H20 and CO2, water and carbon dioxide so it's not only a renewable fuel source, but also a clean one.

If this administration were really serious about energy independance they would give tax credits for ethanol or biodiesel powered vehicles, instead they gave a tax credit for SUVs over 6000 lbs (I wonder why?). They would put 60 billion dollars worth of subsidies into ethanol fuel companies and ethanol farmers instead of into the hands of oil companies. And they would phase out all consumption of gasoline over the next 5 to 10 years.

Despite what fox news tells you, increased domestic drilling and fuel discovery isn't the road to energy independence, it's just a way to put more money into the hands of president Bush's "base".

[edit on 12-6-2006 by ShakyaHeir]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   
House Votes to Cut Funding for these kinds of documentaries and specials.


nuff said.

[edit on 12-6-2006 by TheBandit795]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 10:15 PM
link   
I dont know apoc, maybe its just your local radio station. the NPR I listen to doesn't have the whole left wing bias. I can tell because I get disgusted when I watch CNN because of the liberal bias. Bias is bias, it discredits the source, even if something in it is true.

And bout the guy Apoc, hes right. Getting off of oil is becoming independent and the right path. Not using up our oil. Its not better, just a bit cheaper, and great for businesses like texas oil and gas.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join