While Senators tackle the tough issues of public radio funding

[Soul_Patch]

...The US Government is sending "bags of cash" to Hamid Karzai


"This is transparent. This is something that I've even discussed while I was at Camp David with President Bush," he said, referring to meetings he had with former President George W. Bush at the U.S. presidential retreat outside Washington

"It is not hidden," he said. "We are grateful for the Iranians' help in this regard. The United States is doing the same thing. They are providing cash to some of our offices."


Asked whether the U.S. actually gives bags full of cash to the presidential office, Karzai responded: "Yes, it does give bags of money."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101025/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_iran

Dunno about you, but id rather my taxes go to something i at least get some benefit out of vs. Some corrupt politician from some wasteland of a nation ill never visit.

[CosmicCowboy]

I'd rather it not go to either. We do not need a government funded radio network.

[ChumpDumper]

KUT won't go broke without the funding, that's for sure.

I'm fine with dropping the funding.

Do you want to do away with VOA also, CC?

[RandomGuy]

I'd rather it not go to either. We do not need a government funded radio network.

The big bad government provides, somewhat indirectly, about 2% of the funding.

I am quite sure that corporate gimmies and subsidies to other radio networks easily constitute similar percentages, if not more.

In the vast ocean of things our government does, this is a tempest in a teacup.

I would rather our Congress worry about a few more important matters. I have little problem with big bad gubmint funding the arts.

[Soul_Patch]

I'd rather it not go to either. We do not need a government funded radio network.


While i can agree somewhat. I think its a pretty insignificant issue when so many other things are going on.

Im pretty sure NPR can do just fine without public funding...but if my tax dollars are going somewhere, id much rather them go to NPR vs. Hamid Karzai.

Just sayin...

[Cry Havoc]

The big bad government provides, somewhat indirectly, about 2% of the funding.

I am quite sure that corporate gimmies and subsidies to other radio networks easily constitute similar percentages, if not more.

In the vast ocean of things our government does, this is a tempest in a teacup.

I would rather our Congress worry about a few more important matters. I have little problem with big bad gubmint funding the arts.

Farm subsidies, anyone?

[CosmicCowboy]

KUT won't go broke without the funding, that's for sure.

I'm fine with dropping the funding.

Do you want to do away with VOA also, CC?

I dunno...how relevant do you think VOA is now? Except in the most backwards areas I would think the internet has replaced radio as the primary information source.

I do know that the strong supporters of NPR public funding would change their minds in a heartbeat if it was run by conservatives.

[RandomGuy]

I dunno...how relevant do you think VOA is now? Except in the most backwards areas I would think the internet has replaced radio as the primary information source.

I do know that the strong supporters of NPR public funding would change their minds in a heartbeat if it was run by conservatives.

NPR is one of the more studiously neutral news outlets out there, for precisely that reason.

Some of the choices as to what to cover and when can be somewhat left-leaning, but hardly smacks of the Fox "news" type partisan stench.

Also on the same token, the people who want to cut the funding the most would only really be happy if it were that far leaning towards their political views.

[CosmicCowboy]

NPR is one of the more studiously neutral news outlets out there, for precisely that reason.

Some of the choices as to what to cover and when can be somewhat left-leaning, but hardly smacks of the Fox "news" type partisan stench.

Also on the same token, the people who want to cut the funding the most would only really be happy if it were that far leaning towards their political views.

I don't necessarily agree that NPR is neutral but the fact is, if there was no federal funding it wouldn't matter whether they were left/right/center.

[boutons_deux]

Repugs have regressed to hating ANYTHING that isn't extreme right wing, nothing and nobody is even legitimate if they aren't tea party extremist batshit crazy, so even a Repug or anybody who is centrist and NOT biased like Fox Repug propaganda network is to be purged, eliminated.

NPR is not hard core leftist or progressive, and it's certainly not Repug propaganda, so Repugs want to eliminate NPR.

[johnsmith]

Repugs have regressed to hating ANYTHING that isn't extreme right wing

I consider myself republican and I don't hate everything that isn't extreme right wing........I'm just sayin'

[TeyshaBlue]

I consider myself republican and I don't hate everything that isn't extreme right wing........I'm just sayin'

Relax. boutons lives in a world without nuance or context. :lol

[RandomGuy]

I consider myself republican and I don't hate everything that isn't extreme right wing........I'm just sayin'

You are, I think, an express minority.

I can probably make a fairly good case for the fact that the right-wing political orthodoxy I talk about exists, and that mindset consciously or unconsciously has a "with us or against us" mentality that defines "neutral" as not being right-wing enough.

I would start to build that case by combing through the public statements of many hard-core ideologues, as well as the editorial directives from Mr. Murdoch and company to their subordinates.

Revolutions tend to eat their children, and you might not agree with my and boutons position on this, but do you doubt that political litmus tests have gotten a lot more stringent with the emergence of the tea party movement on the right?

[TeyshaBlue]

You are, I think, an express minority.

I can probably make a fairly good case for the fact that the right-wing political orthodoxy I talk about exists, and that mindset consciously or unconsciously has a "with us or against us" mentality that defines "neutral" as not being right-wing enough.

I would start to build that case by combing through the public statements of many hard-core ideologues, as well as the editorial directives from Mr. Murdoch and company to their subordinates.

Revolutions tend to eat their children, and you might not agree with my and boutons position on this, but do you doubt that political litmus tests have gotten a lot more stringent with the emergence of the tea party movement on the right?

No, I think conservatives such as johnsmith and I are a majority. We just don't get air time. Assigning attributes of the hardcore, which in any movement tend to be a minority, to the rest of the population is fallacious, at best.

[Spurminator]

I don't understand why the Juan Williams controversy has reinvigorated the "defund NPR" crowd. Isn't this just an example of NPR doing what it can (whether you think they went too far or not) to have impartial, objective news analysts?

What is the basis for the argument that they should be defunded? That by firing an analyst for appearing on conservative opinion programming they are necessarily a partisan liberal entity?

[TeyshaBlue]

Revolutions tend to eat their children, and you might not agree with my and boutons position on this, but do you doubt that political litmus tests have gotten a lot more stringent with the emergence of the tea party movement on the right?

No, I don't really think so. Might depend upon your definition of "political litmus test" tho.

[Oh, Gee!!]

if the federal funding comes with strings attached, like needing federal approval to hire and fire employees, then I say cut the funding. If it doesn't, then I think it's election year grandstanding aimed at the tea party crowd.

[clambake]

there wouldn't be a tea party crowd if he were white.

[Spurminator]

"We'll only approve funding public radio if management allows its analysts to appear on cable news shows." Doesn't make sense. Why do you care?

[TeyshaBlue]

there wouldn't be a tea party crowd if he were white.

I think if you bothered to research it a bit, you'd find the Tea Party origins rooted in tax issues almost exclusively.

[boutons_deux]

I consider myself republican and I don't hate everything that isn't extreme right wing........I'm just sayin'

You eligible to be eliminated.

The entire Repug leadership and ALL Repug Congress have gone to the extreme right. They know Repug voters are so stupid they vote Repug 100% of the time.

[clambake]

I think if you bothered to research it a bit, you'd find the Tea Party origins rooted in tax issues almost exclusively.


there wouldn't be a tea party crowd if he were white.

[TeyshaBlue]

I'm tired and stupid today, baker of clams. 'splain yourself.:p:

[DarrinS]

I don't understand why the Juan Williams controversy has reinvigorated the "defund NPR" crowd. Isn't this just an example of NPR doing what it can (whether you think they went too far or not) to have impartial, objective news analysts?



No.


O2gG-vOlnio



Oh, and I'll go ahead and beat the board liberals to it.


"Lol, Krauthammer"

[Spurminator]

No.

O2gG-vOlnio


So they abide by an archaic journalistic code that says correspondents do not have to be as objective as analysts. This is grounds to defund them? Again, why do you care? It's a staffing decision.

[Winehole23]

NPR's shabby treatment of Juan Williams seems more opportunistic than principled to me.

The hypocrisy angle has legs for sure, but I found Krauthammer's denunciation of NPR a bit clunky.

Totenberg sure looked sheepish about spouting the company line and stumbled badly in her own presentation. Maybe she got a little verklempt.

[DarrinS]

A Brief History of NPR's Intolerance and Imbalance






From calling Tea Party members “Tea Baggers,” to saying that "the evaporation of 4 million" Christians would leave the world a better place, to suggesting that God could give former Sen. Jesse Helms or his family AIDS from a blood transfusion, NPR's personalities have said some pretty un-PC things in the past. A look at the record reveals no shortage of intolerant statements and unbalanced segments on the publicly sponsored network's airwaves.

Here's an incomplete list of questionable and controversial content that has aired on NPR or has been uttered by its employees:

-- In June, the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) said it was easy to see why some refer to NPR as "National Palestine Radio" following a June 2 segment hosted by Tom Ashbrook on the Gaza flotilla incident. The segment featured five guests -- none of whom defended Israel's actions.

Among the five guests, Janine Zacharia, a Middle East correspondent for The Washington Post, was the only one who did not overtly criticize Israel. She also did not defend its actions, CAMERA officials said.

"So there you have it -- five perspectives and not one voice to present the mainstream Israeli perspective," they said in a June 17 press release. "That's Ashbrook's and NPR's version of a balanced discussion on Israel."

-- Last week, Newsbusters, a conservative media watchdog group, claimed that NPR's "Fresh Air" spent most of its hour insinuating that the Republican Party was dangerously infested with extremists.

NPR's Terry Gross hosted Princeton professor Sean Wilentz, who has written that President George W. Bush practiced "a radicalized version of Reaganism," Newsbusters' Tom Graham wrote.

"Can you think of another time in American history when there have been as many people running for Congress who seem to be on the extreme?" Gross asked, according to Graham.

"Not running for Congress, no," Wilentz replied. "I mean even back in the '50s."

-- NPR issued an apology in 2005 for a commentator's remark on the return of Christ following a complaint by the Christian Coalition that the comment was anti-Christian.

On "All Things Considered," the network's afternoon drive-time program, humorist Andrei Codrescu said that the "evaporation of 4 million [people] who believe" in the doctrine of Rapture "would leave the world a better place."

Codrescu, who was on contract with NPR but not a full-time employee, later told The Associated Press he was sorry for the language, but "not for what [he] said."

NPR apologized for the comment, saying, it "crossed a line of taste and tolerance" and was an inappropriate attempt at humor.

-- Also in 2005, NPR apologized to Mark Levin, author of "Men in Black: How the Supreme Court is Destroying America," after a broadcast of its program "Day to Day" falsely accused him of advocating violence against judges. Levin accepted the apology, but said the broadcast was "illustrative of a smear campaign launched by the Left to try and silence" his criticisms of judicial activism.

-- In 2002, the head of NPR issued an apology six months after a report linking anthrax-laced letters to a Christian conservative organization.

-- Also in 2002, during an interview with the Philadelphia City Paper, NPR host Tavis Smiley said he strived to do a show that is "authentically black," but not "too black."

-- In 1995, Nina Totenberg, NPR's award-winning legal affairs correspondent, was allowed to keep her job after telling the host of PBS' "Inside Washington" that if there was "retributive justice" in the world, former North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms would "get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it."

[Winehole23]

Quelle horreur.

[clambake]

I'm tired and stupid today, baker of clams. 'splain yourself.:p:

fuck......i keep forgetting the blue!

[ChumpDumper]

lol watchdog.

[RandomGuy]

A Brief History of NPR's Intolerance and Imbalance

Thanks Fox "news".

You might want to attribute the quote there, D.

Pardon me while I ignore the Fox news narrative. Not interested in your cool-aid.

[DarrinS]

Thanks Fox "news".

You might want to attribute the quote there, D.

Pardon me while I ignore the Fox news narrative. Not interested in your cool-aid.


Is this a lie?



Nina Totenberg, NPR's award-winning legal affairs correspondent, was allowed to keep her job after telling the host of PBS' "Inside Washington" that if there was "retributive justice" in the world, former North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms would "get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it."



Why didn't they fire her?

[RandomGuy]

I am not interested in your cool-aid.


Is this a lie?

No, that is true. I am not interested in drinking your cool-aid.

[DarrinS]

No, that is true. I am not interested in drinking your cool-aid.

Why didn't they fire her?

[RandomGuy]

Why didn't they fire her?

I don't know.

Does this mean I get to drag out a list of shitty things that Fox "news" reporters have said?

Or maybe re-post that video of the Fox producer leading a chant at a rally?

[CosmicCowboy]

I don't know.

Does this mean I get to drag out a list of shitty things that Fox "news" reporters have said?

Or maybe re-post that video of the Fox producer leading a chant at a rally?

Fox News doesn't get subsidized by the Federal Government.

Theres a simple fix here. Cut the government funds and let NPR do and say whatever it wants.