Third Party & Independents: Archives

David,

It doesn’t look like the American people found funding CPB that immoral after all.

There is no fiscal responsibility left in our government. I don’t care how “wholesome” something is. The government should not be spending money on stuff that has nothing to do with governing. This is but one small example of an unconstitutional waste of government money that could be better spent paying down our $8,000,000,000,000 debt.

In our last">http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/002372.html#more”>last discussion on the subject, I pointed out the silliness of David wanting to spend money on something like this while at the same time http://www.watchblog.com/thirdparty/archives/002283.html ">accusing republicans of trying to bankrupt the country. I’ve got news for you David: If you refuse to be part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.

If you truly cared that the country is going bankrupt, you would demand this cut and many more. If you truly cared, you would demand that the government, for the first time in history, should start following the tenth amendment to the Constitution.

The Traveller, what you fail to observe is value. Money wasted vs. money well spent. Some believe money for the military is a waste. Some believe Social Security is a waste. Some believe public school funding is a waste.

But, the majority of Americans usually recognize a good value when they see it, and CPB, PBS, and NPR are just such a value. What is 100 million which enriches life for children and adults compared to 100’s of billions used to kill and maim? You don’t have to agree PBS and NPR are a good value. It is OK !

As long as you pay your taxes, you have every legitimate right to squawk about how they are spent. That is the American Way as well. :-)

Rocky,

I don’t think federal funding for CPB is immoral. However, like so many other things the government has to pay for, it’s unconstitutional:

Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The Traveller, Unconstitutional? Good Lord, someone needs to step up to the plate and take this to the Supreme Court, eh? ROLFL !!!!

If Big Bird is so important to our children it would probably be picked up by one of the channels that pays their own way.
I stopped watching Big Bird a long time ago. My children don’t watch Big Bird - Big Bird spends more time being PC than teaching the alphabet these days.
Most cartoons have an agenda or have so much violence and ‘adult’ content that many of us parents can’t just put them on and forget about it - even on PBS. It’s not just the coyote chasing the road runner anymore. Our children are being ‘brainwashed’ by children’s programming.
If you are such a big supporter of PBS then you should just thank your lucky stars a Republican is in charge or it would probably have lost it’s funding. Not that that should be the reason it was saved but we all know how politics don’t work.

As long as you pay your taxes, you have every legitimate right to squawk about how they are spent. That is the American Way as well.

Damn right I do, especially when they are being spent unconstitutionally.

Some believe money for the military is a waste.

Some of it, maybe. But at least it’s being spent legally.

Some believe Social Security is a waste. Some believe public school funding is a waste.

At the federal level, these programs are illegal.

Unconstitutional? Good Lord, someone needs to step up to the plate and take this to the Supreme Court, eh? ROLFL !!!!

Go ahead laugh at the people who actually give a shit about the eight trillion dollar debt and the constitutionality of government spending. It really is all about politics with you isn’t it?

Oh, and Jack, if you’re reading this, here’s my opinion as to what an American Conservative is. Conservatives are people who are willing to government based on the principles laid out in the constitution, and specifically the tenth amendment. I can’t think of one person in any branch of the federal government who is a Conservative.

Dawn, the following is a quote from CPB’s mission statement:

The fundamental purpose of public telecommunications is to provide programs and services which inform, enlighten and enrich the public. While these programs and services are provided to enhance the knowledge, and citizenship, and inspire the imagination of all Americans, the Corporation has particular responsibility to encourage the development of programming that involves creative risks and that addresses the needs of unserved and underserved audiences, particularly children and minorities.

I take it that last sentence is what you refer to as Politically Correct programming and what you object to. If so, I understand. My father supported the KKK and believed the country would go to hell without the KKK. So, I am not oblivious to such reaction to PC programming for children.

Want to address the national debt, Traveller? Pull out of Iraq. Put off trying to put colonies on the Moon and Mars. Kill the enormously expensive star wars waste of all wastes of tax dollars. Enforce corporate contracts to their employees on pensions instead of giving them a legal way out and direct access to tax dollars through the Pension Guaranty Corporation arm of government. Change Bush’s and the Republican’s insane restriction on competitive bidding for Rx drugs in the Medicare program.

These could save a couple trillion over the next decade. But, no, you want to rail about a pittance for a real quality public service and education to the public. I believe you really care about the national debt, and if you do, you should be railing against the big ticket items above, not the small ticket items like CPB.

You could not pay me enough money to be a politician!

Everyone screaming about the deficit but no matter WHAT idea is thrown out to try and resolve it, someone has to scream “that isn’t fair”!! Let’s ask our future generations where fairness got them.
Who’s parents did not tell them that “life isn’t fair”?
Yeah!!Wooh hoo!! We won!! We got PBS!!!
Who gives a shit is this really an issue to be all that passionate about? The way I see it, they had to describe to a T what goes on, on PBS because NO ONE is watching it!!!Responsible parents teach their children accademics and values……NOT Big Bird. Parents that are not responsible….I can gaurantee you they have Jerry Springer on at home, not PBS!

SS reform?
Yeah!Wooh hoo!It looks like you’ll win their also!
But who’s really winning in that?
Not our youth that’s for sure!
Yes I care about grandma, but ya know what, because I care about her I would bring her home w/ me before I would let her die on the street!!!Most caring individuals would die for their childrens benefit, and that is how I feel about my sons financial future!
Of coarse there are the few w/out family…..No one is suggesting that they are just left out in the cold, I’m sure there is an easy solution for that 10-15% that is a whole lot cheaper than the whole nation!!
BESIDES private accounts are only going to be optional….so what the hell is the problem?
Tell me your dooms day tales if you like, but do you honestly think any American politician would get away w/ that? They can’t even get take funds out of stinking PBS!!!

The constitution clearly stats that the Federal Government will provide for the common defense and promote the progress of science.

I cannot find anything in there about providing entertainment

Traci, call your Republicans and complain, or better yet, tell them you won’t vote for them. Cutting CPB funding was their idea. Putting the funding back in was their idea. Without Republicans, CPB funding was not even an issue. Stings like a bitch, don’t it.

James, nothing in there about colonies on the Moon or Mars, or promoting marriage, or the TVA, or Interstate Hwy system, or Hoover Dam, or farm subsidies, or foreign aid to Aids patients in Africa, either. So, your point is?

I think pulling out of Iraq now will cause bigger problems, but we need to do it sometime soon and it will save a hell of a lot of money.

As for all the other stuff you mentioned, you’re right. The government should not be monkeying with any of it.

I don’t care if something is a “pittance” or not. An illegal waste of my money is an illegal waste of my money.

As far as “railing” goes, you’re the one who writes these articles, not me. If you write something that advocates cutting government spending to specific programs (or better still, cutting the programs themselves) and isn’t just about how bad Bush and the republicans are I’ll support your ideas. If you advocate spending more money I won’t. Simple as that.

“Afterall, what Republican wants to run in 2006 against an opponent who can claim the Republican killed Big Bird”

This is exactly right! These kinds of half-truths, if not flat-out lies, would have been told against Republicans, so they caved. IN FACT, Big Bird, Sesame Street and the rest of the kids shows make PBS money, and need absolutely no public funding. If all public funding for PBS was removed, these shows would go nowhere. The only thing that requires funding is the programming for adults, which is a completely unjustified ploy by some adults to force other adults to subsidize their viewing preferences. Then, when they fear that this unjustified subsidization will be removed, the hide behind Big Bird and other kids’ programming that needs not public funding to begin with.

I guess as long as the agenda of PBS fits into your scheme of things it is fine and dandy. How would you feel if the children’s shows were promoting the KKK and defending traditional values - such as with marriage? Would you still be for it?
I watch shows on PBS. Some of them are fairly good. As long as they stick to programs that are not politically biased or promoting a certain agenda - fine.

You have to remember the (R)ightist punditry has convinced the conservatives that PBS is “brainwashing children with a liberal agenda.” So, the GOP had to do something even though they know this is just a load of BullS.
It went like this: the Repubs got the headlines about removing the money, then they gave the religious dogs their bone with Harrison, then congress let the money back in so the Dems could strut.
GOP 2 Dems 1 (GOP congress; back with #42 it was the other way around)
Just another day in DC…

Matty said,

The Republican don’t want to fund PBS for a simple reason. The news and the programs simply do not compatible with the view of the world according to the current White House narrow view point. Listen, people in PBS, you have to be aggresive. Expose all the S**t that going on in the White House. Your mandate is to serve the public with unbias news. Just keep telling America that the war in Irad was never about WMD. And the country should demand a hearing on this issue. Once you remove the current no good White House with the democrat, you will have your operating budget increased!!!

The gospe according to Matty

Traveler,

Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Sorry, but I must disagree. It is NOT unconstitutional. This isue has been decided over and over by the Supreme court. The explanation is

the Tenth Amendment “states but a truism that all is retained which has not been surrendered.”

In US v Darby, 1941 It states:

There is nothing in the history of its adoption to suggest that it was more than declaratory of the relationship between the national and state governments as it had been established by the Constitution before the amendment or that its purpose was other than to allay fears that the new national government might seek to exercise powers not granted, and that the states might not be able to exercise fully their reserved powers. See e.g., II Elliot’s Debates, 123, 131; III id. 450, 464, 600; IV id. 140, 149; I Annals of Congress, 432, 761, 767-768; Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, secs. 1907, 1908.

United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 (1941). By its terms, the Amendment does not purport to limit the commerce power or any other enumerated power of Congress.

United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 (1941). ”While the Tenth Amendment has been characterized as a ‘truism,” stating merely that ‘all is retained which has not been surrendered,’ [citing Darby], it is not without significance. The Amendment expressly declares the constitutional policy that Congress may not exercise power in a fashion that impairs the States’ integrity or their ability to function effectively in a federal system.” Fry v. United States, 421 U.S. 542, 547 n.7 (1975). This policy was effectuated, at least for a time, in National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 833 (1976)

The 10th amendment has been debated for generations, and in case after case, the Courts have agreed that The Federal government has the Constitutional Right to enact privisions as long as it does not conflict with the rights it has implicitly designated to the states.

Hi All:

Let me see if I got this correct using the math I learned in public schools & from my parents (just a little help from “Sesame Street” and “The Electric Company”) 284 for, 140 against. I’d say that was roughly a 67% /33% Split would you not agree? Well 67/33 is more of a mandate, than 51%/48+%? Don’tcha think? I have a suggestion to all of you out there who don’t want your tax dollars going to such Liberal Thinking Ideas. Come up with better ideas yourself, oh you can’t, why you ask? Thinking is not something the conservatives want you to do; it might TAX your Brains, Excessively.

As Always,
Wayne

David,

It boggles the mind that some from the right, who will remain nameless, have become so petty that they can’t or won’t see CPB or PBS as a benefit to the population of this country. They only see it as dollars wasted because they either don’t enjoy it themselves, or they don’t feel that the government (I guess that would be us) should be funding an intelligent alternative to the morass that our commercial media has become.

What they forget in their Quixotesque campaign is that Sancho isn’t behind them to call their representatives, and they actually have to do that themselves. Bitching that the funding isn’t Constitutional or immoral doesn’t appear to have gotten the job done.
In other words they have nothing to complain about, because all they are doing is spouting their opinions on watchblog, and not telling those that represent them what their views are.

Apparently those from the left and right that are capable seeing the benefits, and are willing to support CPB, and PBS have greater clout with Congress than those that don’t.

You know, most regular Republicans I know never saw bias at PBS in the first place. And not on NPR, either.

I know where the more extreme group gets the idea that PBS and NPR are “liberal bias” media. But most of that stems from three consistent themes you find on the stations:

1) Learn to share
2) Be tolerant of others
3) Be a high brow intellectual

If this is the gold standard of liberalism, well then, I’m pleased to cede the field.

But when did being an intellectual become a dirty thing? Most people I know DO think the program “This American Life” is liberal. But why? It’s not like the guy talks about politics much at all. What makes people feel like it’s liberal is because the guy who airs the show is: A) Gay B) Intellectual.

Sesame street has become “liberal” because it puts on a muppet character with AIDS. But the issue is, that we do have kids born with AIDS, as much as we would wish otherwise. Being tolerant of a kid with Aids is very “liberal” sounding, but at the end of the day, the show isn’t sending a message about sex, it’s sending a message about being tolerant. Since when is tolerance only the domain of liberals?

And let’s face it, sharing with others is communism. Anything that preaches sharing with others sounds “liberal”. But is it?

I was talking to a very good friend of mine, who happens to also be one of the most extremist right-wing types I know, about child rearing. He was saying that mothers were naturally liberals because they were “permissive” and “kind” and “sweet” and didn’t like games with competition, and made their kids take fancy shmancy art classes. And he said that had his place, and that’s why he liked women, but men were naturally “conservatives” who were “disciplanrians” and pro-competition, etc. etc. etc.

It was as if the only way to be a real “conservative” was to be some red-neck with a beer gut at a tail gate party who smacked around their kids, and the only way to be a “liberal” was to attend yoga classes while cleansing your chakra and teaching your kids organic farming.

This is silly stereotyping.

Most Republicans I know are too busy working to bother with this nonsense. They like Sesame Street, and there are plenty of them that listen to NPR and enjoy it for its intellectual stimulation. Who do you see at these fundraisers? Wealthy Republicans (and Democrats, too, of course). Public programming gets over 75% of it’s money from other means. The rest from CPB enables them to avoid the pitfalls that come with being beholden to advertisers.

By far, the very best news organization in the world is PBS. In fact, when I was researching Betchel to see if it was really as bad as everyone said it was, it was only PBS that had the facts on all sides. And it was the one source that convinced me that Betchel wasn’t the “center of all evil”. But it didn’t whitewash Betchel either. I know some Republicans who swear there was “liberal bias” in that report. But if it convinced this “liberal” that Betchel wasn’t evil, then it can’t have been that biased.

PBS has a series of comprehensive investigative programs. And everyone I have read (including the California power crisis) has been amazingly fair and balanced. (Go over and read it at their website. In fact, I’d say that they were a little TOO fair to Cheney)

It was only on PBS, after the presidential debates, that I saw a Republican commentary about what Kerry did right, and a Democratic commentary about what Bush did right. Stunning. No other show did that.

I love PBS. I love NPR. I love it because it’s quality. And, as a person who creates “snack entertianment” for the masses, I can promise you, there’s nothing out there that has better quality. Not the BBC, not CNN, not Speilberg or HBO. Or the New York Times, or the Washington Times.

Here’s saluting quality and integrity. And the Democrats AND Republicans that recognize it.

Also, I should point out that it was the South African version of Sesame Street with the AIDS character, and that 1 in 9 people there have AIDS. And also, I don’t think the South African program recieves public funding… so I probably shouldn’t have brought it up. But lately, people have been flinging that at me as an example of liberal bias. So.. eh, whatever.

David,

Correct me if I’m wrong, but have we come to the point where Conservatives have to now prove there’s a Liberal bias at PBS and NPR?

I too, was impressed by the grassroots advocacy of PFTAW on this issue, but more astounded by their success in getting the CPB funding restored. This would not have happened, if not for the widening ‘credibility gap’ plaguing the Right.

Rocky, excellent point about Congressional pressure on this issue.

Julia, excellent observations, and I agree, those who view NPR and PBS as biased, either cherry pick comments from the shows, or don’t watch/listen to them.

I loved your observations about the male/female stereotyping of your friend. There is not doubt that there are perceptual and psychological differences between men and women in general, but, the extrapolation from the sexes to political persuasion based on those criteria is the product of oversimplified thinking and unsupported conjecture. I live in the heart of Texas and sex has little to do with 7 out of 10 being Republican. It is about complex dynamics like history, peer group identification, etc. not whether one is a wus or girlie man, or some such simple notion.

But, lack of education and training in empirical science and college level deductive reasoning and logic disciplines, will lead to such perspectives on the world, and it is amazing to me how much education itself is becoming a negative attribute in this country. When a large portion of a nation’s people trash education as a negative personality attribute, that nation is headed for deep and serious trouble.

Bert, there is insufficient evidence at this point in time to say that Americans have reached a tipping point on the see-saw of conservatism and liberalism. I personally don’t think that is what is happening here. I think what we are seeing is a backlash against extremism, and trying to defund Big Bird and highly eduational programming that fosters informed consent enjoyed by millions on the basis of liberal basis is the kind of overthetop BS that Americans just won’t buy into.

If government is going to use tax dollars for public TV and radio, I wish it would be for radio & TV stations to educate the people:
(1) how government often mismanages and cleverly abuses voters;
(2) that there are always some people want to control others, and we must be wary;
(3) that voters must learn to recognize the tactics, and methods that some politicians use to over-complicate things, hide things, cloud the issues, obscure the facts, talk endlessly, make it appear they’re doing hard work, tax and spend, and legally plunder tax payers, while government provides little (or no) benefit to society;
(4) that voters they must learn to keep a close watch on government, and demand transparency wherever possible;
(5) that ignoring government invites abuse and corruption;
(6) that government must devise all systems with transparency in mind; with controls in place to identify illegal activity, and prosecute those guilty;
(7) that government will attempt, but voters must reject the clever distractions (e.g. partisan divisiveness, petty partisan politics and bickering, religion, race, gender, wealth, age, nationality, language, level of education, flag burning, etc.) that are cleverly used and abused to distract us from the fact that government is failing us, the people;
(8) that we must all reject the myth perpetuated by some pandering politicians … that we can all live at the expense of everyone else, because, before long, everyone is riding in the wagon, while no one is left to push the wagon;
(9) that we, the people, do our part too, to be responsible to make government responsible too;
(10) that the voters and government each have a duty to keep each other honest, to maintain a balance of power between the government and the people, because the politicians will never reform voluntarily, and government has a tendency to grow it’s power and reach everywhere it can, and people have a tendency to become complacent and lazy and fail to hold government accountable; after all, it’s for our overall mutual benefit.

d.a.n, PBS & NPR have huge amounts of educatonal & informational programming. In fact, you can earn college credits on PBSYou. Except for Satellite’s history and science channels, there is little competition for PBS’s educational programming. How do you think I got to be such a smart ass?

TheTraveler,

The government should not be spending money on stuff that has nothing to do with governing.

Then you should be fine with the government funding the CPB. In a democracy, especially one as convoluted as ours, the public needs to have the facilities to be informed. Having (mostly) commercial-free venues that can operate without the pressures of market forces is important to guaranteeing those facilities. The government even had the wisdom to make the CPB (theoretically) free of political influence to ensure its independence. An informed public makes for better voters. It’s a matter of providing for the general welfare.

Not to mention it fulfills so much more than simply reporting current events (as shown in their mission statement that David quoted). I would hate to lose NPR (Morning Edition, The Diane Rehm Show, Talk of the Nation/Science Friday, The World, All Things Considered) and PBS (Frontline, Nova, Scientific American Frontiers, National Geographic, Nature, POV, News Hour). It would be a tragic loss for our country, now and into the future. I’m happy they got their funding back.

Since we are paying for it once again I think we should give cookies back to Cookie Monster and take away those stupid vegetables.

I have heard that there will be alternating hosts on Sesame Street beginning with Rush Limbaugh, then Bolton and finishing off with Rumsfeld.

David R. Remer:

Before you start crowing at the justice of it all, I suggest you all take a look at this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/26/opinion/26rich.html?hp

Yes. Give Cookie Monster back his cookies!!!!

A quote from Aldous’ link above states:

That doesn’t mean the right’s new assault on public broadcasting is toothless, far from it. But this time the game is far more insidious and ingenious. The intent is not to kill off PBS and NPR but to castrate them by quietly annexing their news and public affairs operations to the larger state propaganda machine that the Bush White House has been steadily constructing at taxpayers’ expense.

This is precisely what the PFAW alluded to in the original article:

While this will undoubtedly help secure the financial future of independent public broadcasting, its political future is still very much in doubt. Ken Tomlinson, head of the CPB, continues his efforts to turn it into a mouthpiece of the Republican Party.

This however, has the potential of backfiring on Republicans, or turning CPB into a political football to come back and haunt them when a Democrat takes the Whitehouse and appoints their own propaganda minister. It is a sad day indeed that Republicans decided to politicize every possible instituion in America from churches to PBS to homeless shelters. From Newt Gingrich to this day, that strategy has been in place, but, as polls show, it is a strategy that comes with no guarantees of public popularity.

I’m not really against PBS and NPR. I’m just not certain government should be spending tax payers’ money on everything in the universe.
Also, we have to carefully choose our battles. This one isn’t worth fighting against, since it does have some saving virtues. And, it all adds up.
The way government spends money never ceases to amaze me. It like me, say I were flat broke, just lost my job, the rent is past due, my kid needs braces, the electric bill is due tomorrow, and then, even though there’s nothing wrong with my car, I go out and buy a new car on credit (and it’s a huge HUMMER too, that gets 9 miles per gallon, despite the rising cost of fuel). My family and friends might say that it irresponsible, eh?

At any rate, you know me. I prefer a much smaller, leaner, more responsible, more honest, more accountable government…not something we’ll see soon. And when we do, it won’t just be another recession. It will only be after the branch that our nest is sittin’ on, that we’ve all been crappin’ in, snaps, because the nest became so loaded down and full of crap, that the branch couldn’t take it any more.

After all, “The sky is falling!” “The sky is falling!”

No, seriously, if we keep chippin’ away at the foundation, it will eventually collapse. If I didn’t know better, I’d say government is trying to do just that, but it’s really that they think we (the U.S.) are invincible, and every tax payer has a money tree in their back yard, and the people, well they truly ain’t got a clue do they ?

With all this complaining about how liberal PBS is, apparently nobody remembers “Firing Line”.
William F. Buckley ruthlessly hosed Democrats weekly on this program, and nobody bitched.

To give credit where credit is due, I was reminded of this by;

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

He may be a little rude, and a little blue, but he is worth the read.

Nice post Julia — I agree with your sentiments 100%.

I’m with Aldous on this. At first it seemed great that funding was going to be restored, but then when you look at what the Republican’s have been doing with their “studies” of CPB and NPR — and their plans for the future of both, it seems much less rosy. It’s almost like they used the previously proposed cuts as a reason to fire up a whole lot of public support so that no one will think to complain when they slowly transform both of them into new propaganda machines for the GOP.
Aldous previously gave the url for this op-ed by Frank Rich which appeared in the NY Times, but I think everyone who appreciates the programming on PBS and NPR should take a minute to read it, and to that end, I’m making it into a link:
The Armstrong Williams NewsHour

Adrienne, this plan of theirs will backfire on them. The backfire is built in. Here is why. Audiences to the mainstay educational and informational programs appeal to an audience of greater critical analysis than the general population. By definition, those who seek education and information are going to be more critically analytical than general consumers of HBO and Showtime who have no interest in educational and informational programming.

So, as they propagandize NPR and PBS, audiences will tune those programs out, except perhaps for occasional entertainment value. These moves by conservatives will be self-defeating.

David,
I think you’re entirely right about the fact that what they’re trying to do won’t hold up to the critical analysis it will receive by the current audiences of both NPR and PBS. But don’t you see, they might then use the fact that the ratings have fallen off in the future as a reason why it should no longer be funded with our tax dollars.
And in the meantime, they can also point to the complaints they are bound to get and say, “See, these liberals don’t want PBS and NPR to be fair and balanced!” Or (once it becomes nothing more than a propaganda machine), nobody will care about trying to save it, since what we’ve all loved about it will disappear, and then they’ll say: “See, they said they wanted so much to save it, but now they’re being flip-floppers! These liberals never seem to know what they want from one year to the next!”

Ahh, but, Adrienne, the flip side is, conservative audiences will tune in to the propaganda shows. So, the loss of audience by the critically analytical will be minimized by the tuning in conservatives.

This could even result in uncritically thinking conservatives actually tuning in to some educational and cultural arts programs who may never have otherwise. Hard to know, for sure.

But, I have the feeling viewership will not drop that significantly. I know I am watching PBS and NPR even more this last week than previously just because of my heightened awareness that there is programming there I have not thought about watching for a long time.

Also, look for a voter backlash in 2008 to put a Democrat in the Whitehouse, at which time, the propaganda machine turns in the other direction restoring viewers previously lost, and losing viewers recently gained. In the end, I don’t think the numbers will drop that significantly.

David:
“Ahh, but, Adrienne, the flip side is, conservative audiences will tune in to the propaganda shows.”

:^/ You’re right. I hadn’t thought about that.

“So, the loss of audience by the critically analytical will be minimized by the tuning in conservatives.

Ugh.

“This could even result in uncritically thinking conservatives actually tuning in to some educational and cultural arts programs who may never have otherwise.”

I really doubt they’ll keep it educational or cultural — since the Right seems very determined to stamp out both in our lifetime. I was thinking they’d probably start interfering with the content of exisiting shows, and also add a few more talking-head programs which will spout the rightwing visions for the future, and they’re version of the “truth”.

“Hard to know, for sure.”

Yeah. And it’s going to be hard to watch and listen if they begin destroying it.

“I know I am watching PBS and NPR even more this last week than previously just because of my heightened awareness that there is programming there I have not thought about watching for a long time.”

But if it starts sounding more like a propaganda machine, won’t you begin tuning it out? I know I will — and if that is what it becomes, I won’t care about saving it in the future.

“Also, look for a voter backlash in 2008 to put a Democrat in the Whitehouse, at which time, the propaganda machine turns in the other direction restoring viewers previously lost, and losing viewers recently gained.”

That’s just the thing. I don’t want it to turn into a propaganda machine for whatever party happens to be in power. I want it to stay as well balanced as has always managed to be.

David R. Remer:

How do you think I got to be such a smart ass?

I have often wondered (lol).

So, what is my excuse?

Seriously, when I was a kid, channel 38 (PBS)only came in when the moon was full, the sky was clear, my mom held the antenna and we all joined hands and sung a perfect B flat. In other words, though it was around, it had no effect on me or any of the many kids in my neighborhood.

Now, enter my children. When they were of an age that watched cartoons, I was much happier seeing them watch PBS (then on cable) than any of the other trash cartoons. There is no denying they are more “wholesome.”

However, we all squawk about the deficit and national debt. Is this where we start? If we do, the dedicated watchers will scream. Okay, so start with the military. If we do, those who support the military growth will scream. Name a topic or program and it has its supporters. The cycle never ends. It’s the budgetary equivalent of NIMBY. Only its, Not In My Program.

I see value in PBS, NPR. I think it is a good place for the kids programs, and, so long as there is no political slant, adult programming. Educate without indoctrinating.

Chi Chi, you have of course put your thumb on the root of the problem with deficits.

However, it is not as bleak as it first appears. Despite rumors to the contrary, common sense does still exist in the American voting public.

Follow this logic. The deficits and debt pose a liabiilty both present and future. Many spending programs achieve a benefit both present and future. Many spending programs achieve primary benefits today, but, not futuristic (medical vaccine development and CDC). Others in the future, but, little today (colonies on the Moon and Mars).

So, one logical common sense approach is to increase revenues where they can be afforded, and decrease spending on programs (for the time being) which will not produce a benefit except in the future. Prioritize #1 those programs which provide benefit today and tomorrow and those with a primary benefit today which are indispensable.

After deficits have been reversed and the national debt has been returned to a level insuring future borrowing cushion in the event of emergencies or economic downturns, then reinstate priorities that have only a future benefit.

Where would CPB funding all along this prioritization scheme? Probably second tier. And, if leadership informed the public that it was pursuing such a common sensical strategy to restore fiscal health to the country, asked CPB viewers to make the sacrifice for the cause, a very large number of them would go along.

But, there currently is no common sense fiscal strategy in place, and no appeal by leadership to the common sense of voters nor an appeal to them to make sacrifices to a greater cause. In the absence of such leadership, asking anyone to sacrifice their particular benefit will not be well met, and in fact, vociferously opposed.

The majority of PBS kid shows have huge marketing ties ins. Thnik of all the Sesame Street, Clifford, Arthur, Boo Bah, Maya & Miguel, Dragon Tales and Barney products you see all over the place. Where’s the money from all those sales?

Sesame Street, Barney and Clifford alone should be able to generate enough income from their product sales to sustain themselves, as well as help other shows that lack the toy dollars like Reading Rainbow, Zoom, and Mr. Rogers.

I don’t agree with all the programming on PBS, but I see it’s value. My comprise would be to cut funding on the kids shows that could be self sustaining and use the tax funding for other show that don’t have the marketability of Sesame Street. The result would be a reduction in taxes spent on PBS while making support available for shows that need it.

Hopefully people can see past the picture of politicians out to get Cookie Monster and Barney. Now that’s marketing.

There is no end to the list of unconstitutionally “good things” we can spend taxes on, and the willingness of many to proceed down that spending road is one of the most dangerous problems we face as a nation. When Americans sack America on their way to doing “good things” for Americans, then our enemies on the outside need only bide their time.

This road to hell is paved with good spending intentions, and those not on the same road are thought not to have good will. After all, it is hateful not wanting children or any other worthy group to have good things, is it not. If the unconstitutional “good things” spenders could somehow get rid of the constitutional spenders, then they of course could amicably decide amongst themselves which are the highest “good things” to spend their way to national destruction.