When you can listen to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity for free, who needs NPR? It reaches 33 million listeners through its member stations, with its 36 bureaus and offices around the world, and local coverage produced by more than 270 independent NPR member public radio stations across the country. Republicans hate that. In the House of Representatives they voted their conscience, and this tells us everything we need to know. It’s not about the money.
Four decades ago, Congress passed and President Lyndon Johnson signed the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. In his comments about the new law, President Johnson said, “I believe the time has come to enlist the computer and the satellite, as well as television and radio, and to enlist them in the cause of education.” He further prophesied, “Think of the lives that this would change:--the student in a small college could tap the resources of a great university.”
To provide programming not generally available commercially was the idea that congress foresaw at the time. Lawmakers envisioned educational shows and cultural enrichment programs, not to mention informing the electorate through news programming and in-depth analysis of current issues. Another objective was to make such programs available to less affluent Americans and residents of small communities and rural areas.
The law that created the Corporation for Public Broadcasting says, “It is in the public interest for the Federal Government to ensure that all citizens of the United States have access to public telecommunications services through all appropriate available telecommunications distribution technologies.”
However, the prescience of Johnson’s comments and the nobility of the legal language evaporated when a hidden camera captured NPR executive Ron Shiller saying that NPR would be better off without federal funding. But that’s not all. Shiller also ripped into the tea party movement as a bunch of “gun toting racists,” adding “and not just Islamaphobic, but really xenophobic.”
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Fat Arse
I "Need" NPR! As a Canadian who's been inundated with every aspect of the drivel that spews from the MSM south of my border these past four decades; NPR is one of the few venues that gives me faith and the reassurance I need to believe that there is still, in fact, an American Dream worth lauding and promoting. A dream that deserves to be propagated, a dream worthy of consideration, a national dream to inspire others less fortunate than us to seek not just wealth and power; but a dream that prizes not just freedom - but also truth, equality, fairness, and compassion. In short, a dream that matters. Without NPR the dream will be shortchanged.
2 - troll
Mack is clearly trying to get gun-toting crazed leftists to target house republicans with his npr graphic...whatever happens is on his head
3 - Doug Hunter
Certainly, since we're $14 Trillion in debt saving anything less that $100 Billion is just spinning your wheels, might as well not even bother cutting it.... geniuses.
There are 300 million of us, every $300 million of waste is *ONLY* $1 per person and there's always a good cause or greedy pocket or special interest group or corporate welfare case that could use $300 million. Their interest in getting a third of a billion is more than your interest in defending $1 of debt (that you'll never actually pay in tax as it will be paid by the Chinese). That's why we are doomed to monetary collapse.
4 - Baronius
In one sense, every budget conversation other than Medicare/Medicaid reform is just spinning the wheels. Still, any cut of an unnecessary program is a positive thing. Tommy, you fail to make the case that NPR spending is necessary; in fact, on the financial side, you make the opposite case.
The deeper question is the matter of NPR's political leaning. You suspect the Republicans' vote of being motivated by NPR's content. Do you think NPR is simply to the left of Limbaugh, or do you think that they're on the left? The Democrats voted as more of a bloc than the Republicans on this one: do you think the Democrats could have been motivated by politics as well? If a magazine were published that nearly every Republican opposed, and every present Democrat favored, wouldn't you suspect that magazine of being pro-D and anti-R? Would you have any qualms if that magazine were published with your tax dollars?
5 - Tommy Mack
House Republicans held an emergency session on HR 1076, the NPR funding cut. What was the emergency?
The left politics or right politics argument is referred to as the False Dichotomy Fallacy, which excludes anything in the middle. The majority of NPR programming is neither left nor right. NPR stations broadcast programs ranging from A Prairie Home Companion and The Thistle & Shamrock to Car Talk and Wait Wait . . . Don’t Tell Me. The news programs Fresh Air and All Things Considered must drive the GOP nuts.
As I said, it’s not about the money. It is all about the content. The GOP doesn’t like NPR content because they are focusing on a small percentage of it that they disagree with. I am sure Rush Limbaugh agrees with me.
Tommy
6 - Ruvy
"I'm Bob Edwards, and this is Morning Edition - on National Public Radio."
For over two decades this is what I woke up to in the morning. I sent money to these guys when I could (which was not all that often), and felt that for the most part, I was getting better coverage than what I would get on commercial radio, with all of its used tires hucksters.
Then I moved here. I couldn't pick up NPR, but started to realize that NPR had been feeding me a line of pro-Arab bullshit for all the years I had been sending them money. I'd like my money back. When I heard this fool of a "development executive" say that NPR would be better off without the government's money, and that the Zionists and the Jews ran the media in America, I was convinced that these guys were a pack of shit.
Let these scamsters make money the old fashioned way - earning it. The good stuff on public radio, by the way, does not come from these fucking leftist bastards - it comes from the empire builder, Bill Kling, and his baby, American Public Radio.
7 - Boeke
There's not much to cheer a leftist on NPR, but one suspects that rightists get angry at anything not exclusively rightist.
When I hear a partisan issue on NPR I sometimes grab a stopwatch and measure how much time they give to left and right spokesmen for each side and the result is that they are equal, usually to the second. Try it yourself, and report the results.
8 - Dan
Bravo to James O'keefe for exposing the ugly bigotry at NPR.
It's not so much about the dollar amount as it is about principle. NPR is a propaganda tool of the Democrat party. They can dispense their slanted distortions all they want, but let their deluded supporters pay for it.
I would be in favor of O'keefe receiving a federally subsidised whistle blower fee for his good work. The savings to taxpayers in defunding the fraud infested, child prostitution enablers at ACORN amounts to several billion.
9 - Glenn Contrarian
Boeke #7 -
Well said - amen!
10 - Glenn Contrarian
Dan -
Are you aware of the fact that O'Keefe EDITED his tape again? And just like the Shirley Sherrod tape, the UNEDITED tape shows the speaker saying something that was NOT what O'Keefe made it seem with his arbitrary editing.
But that's not important to you, is it? It doesn't matter that O'Keefe uses lies and outright deception to make YOU - that's YOU, Dan - cheer him on for using those lies and deceptions to get you what you want!
11 - Tommy Mack
Glenn is right on. Here is an interview with O'Keefe you might or might not like.
What part of the John DeLorean episode did so many executives miss? Are they just too young to recall? Just asking.
Tommy
12 - Boeke
O'Keefe is a proven liar. He's been exposed on both the Acorn tapes and the Sherrod tape. He edits innocent comments and re-arranges statements to create an appearance of incrimination.
Anyone who credits O'Keefe is either a fool or a rightist eager to be deceived by propaganda.
So, the question really is: why did the mainstream media so eagerly accept the story from O'Keefe and repeat it everywhere? Are the MSM people ultra-rightist or are they stupid?
Incidentally, one might ask "why doesn't someone pull the same stunt on O'Keefe himself and publicize it?" And the answer is: someone did. The radio program "On The Media", which broadcasts a weekly report on events in the media, interviewed O'Keefe and then pulled an O'Keefe on him, making him look quite mad.
13 - Dan
Accusations of deceptive editing in any of O'Keefes expose's are absurd.
Delusional leftists can choose not to believe their lying eyes, but the truth marches on. That's why people got fired, and ACORN was defunded.
Continue on with your denial though. The refusal to confront reality in these instances of progressive malfeasance offers far better testimony to sane people about the hopeless zealotry of the radical left.
14 - Glenn Contrarian
And why do you believe that, Dan? Because you do NOT have an earnest desire to be OBJECTIVE. If you did, if you actually were determined to find out BOTH sides of the story, then you'd know better than to defend O'Keefe.
If you'll check around, Dave Nalle and Clavos and even Arch-Con all know better than to defend O'Keefe. Maybe you should get a clue from their silence....
15 - El Bicho
"Accusations of deceptive editing in any of O'Keefes expose's are absurd."
And yet accurate. Even right-leaning organizations have reported on it, so who exactly is the delusional one?
16 - Dan
O'Keefe does not need defending. He is the one doing the exposing. Attacking the messenger is a foolish way of defending the exposed.
Only someone who has lost the desire to be "OBJECTIVE" engages in your group think mentality anyway.
Although if you were to "check around" you'd see that your view of O'Keefe is not the dominant one. Again, that is why people were fired and ACORN was defunded. There was no adequate defense for those O'Keefe exposed.
17 - Glenn Contrarian
Okay, Dan -
Go HERE and see how O'Keefe's NPR video WAS edited, and deceptively so.
And who was it that exposed the deceptive editing? Irony of ironies, it was GLENN BECK's website, The Blaze!
And while you're at it, you can check out how O'Keefe deceptively edited the ACORN videos. The same reference quotes an independent legal review, a former attorney general who said, "Although Mr. O'Keefe appeared in all videos dressed as a pimp, in fact, when he appeared at each and every office, he was dressed like a college student -- in slacks and a button down shirt."
SO HOW IS THAT NOT DECEPTIVE EDITING, DAN????
And let's not forget Shirly Sherrod. From the Christian Science Monitor:
"Mr. Breitbart published on his website a 2-1/2 minute clip of a video showing Sherrod at an NAACP luncheon, talking about how she did not use the full force of her office to help a white farmer. The clip set off a furor, resulting in Sherrod's forced resignation, tendered via BlackBerry from the side of a road.
A full airing of the video, however, showed that Sherrod, who grew up in the Jim Crow South, was making a point about her own journey - how she has stopped stereotyping based on race and realized that the greatest inequality in America today is class. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and President Obama both apologized to Sherrod, and offered her another job in the Agriculture Department.
And even Andrew Breitbart had some words for O'Keefe!
"I think he needs to listen to what his supporters have to say when they have a problem with this. Not to be so head strung, to listen when some people give you advice... There are people out there who are trying to reach him and telling him that he's going to be held to a higher standard and that he should hold himself to that higher standard."
OKAY, Dan? So...exactly how are you going to explain away all this? By still claiming that O'Keefe didn't deceptively edit anything? Even after all this EVIDENCE showing that he did?
I betcha won't even answer...because if you do, you'll either have to man up and apologize...or make yourself look even more naive.
18 - Tommy Mack
You are correct, Dan. He does not need defending, here. He might need defending in court, but that is another matter.
Don Imus perfected such stunts as O's in the '70s on radio. It's just that Imus knew the boundaries he pushed. He worked for a network with lawyers.
I know of few people, however, that relied on an Imus stunt for their opinion.
Tommy
19 - El Bicho
"Only someone who has lost the desire to be 'OBJECTIVE' engages in your group think mentality anyway."
A point you repeatedly prove in your defense of O'Keefe's tactics.
20 - zingzing
dan, to me you're either stupid or a liar or an ass or something else entirely for letting o'keefe sucker you. but i'm betting on one of the first two. i will fuck horses.
--or, in o'keefe style--
dan, i... bet... you're... a... stupid... liar. or else... i... will... let... dan... 's... horses... ass... fuck... me.
seriously, you can't be that easily manipulated. it's just not possible. you have to be able to figure out what's going on in those videos. it's blatantly obvious. please, please don't be that dumb.
21 - Ruvy
"I don' wanna believe what my lyin' eyes tell me! They edited the tape! It's all a lie!!"
And there will be a ten dollar silver coin under your pillow when you all lose your wisdom teeth. You wisdom never came in, so you don't need your wisdom teeth fer nuthin'.
Fer satisfacrion, contact:
The Tooth Fairy
North Pole (currently on the move)
Slip Code: 3378945618733441
22 - Dr Dreadful
Ruvy, by that logic, I assume you watched the heavily-edited tape of Inception and concluded that it proves Leonardo DiCaprio really can break into people's dreams.
23 - Baronius
NPR's funding would have been an issue whether or not O'Keefe made that tape.
24 - zingzing
baronius--and maybe for good reason. i read an interesting article about another formerly gov't-sponsored org that weaned itself off such sponsorship and is doing all the better for it, including the fact that it's no longer beholden to any political interests whatsoever. the way they did it, iirc, is that they asked that funding not be completely cut off, but successively lowered down to nothing over a three year period. over that period, they were able to convince their audience that in order for them to continue doing the work that they do, their audience needed to fund them more and more until they were free of federal funding.
that said, the republican's current plans, which will never get through the senate, so whatever, would just be another republican plan that kills jobs. yay, right? and besides, this is pretty much the republicans trying to punish npr for its perceived liberal bias, no matter how you try to spin it. beyond that, it's a waste of time and political posturing. the house has bigger fish to fry, and that they spent a second on this is just kind of pathetic. between this and that king guy, watching the republicans "get to work" has been very disappointing indeed.
25 - Tommy Mack
There is nothing like a tempest in a tea party pot, which is what the new House majority seems to be all about. Their emergency meeting on NPR funding is just one of many items on a growing list to stuff that they know is doomed to successful failure. There are health care bills they know they can't pass, abortion bills they know they can't pass, climate bills they know they can't pass, and budget bills they know they can't pass.
The voters that elected them must really be impressed with the amount of time, money and energy their House GOP representatives have spent on defending the Defense of Marriage Act, recklessly accusing Muslim Americans of disloyalty, and pushing culture-war bills related to vouchers, English as the 'official' language, and 'In God We Trust.'
Baronius is right when he says, “NPR's funding would have been an issue whether or not O'Keefe made that tape.” Senator Saxby Chambliss agrees about that, but also says, “You know, an awful lot of conservatives listen to NPR. It provides a very valuable service.” The Georgia Republican also thinks that “total elimination of funding is probably not the wisest thing to do.” He is being politically kind.
Tommy