• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

De-fund NPR and PBS

Defund NPR and PBS!

  • I agree!

    Votes: 41 47.7%

  • I disagree.

    Votes: 45 52.3%
  • Total voters
    86
TacticalEvilDan said:
No, you miss the point. What's the point of having a fight over public broadcasting when it's like 0.002% of the budget while we're hemorrhaging money elsewhere?

In other words, why expend the mental energy and political capital on something so small compared to other much larger budget items?
Click to expand...

Because it's political move, and it's a symbolic move. Pure and simple.
 
X Factor said:
You miss the point. Yes, there are bigger fish that have to be fried, but how are we ever going to do that if we're not even willing to cut the small, clearly nonessential stuff?
Click to expand...

What good is cutting the small, clearly nonessential stuff? Of all the things to be outraged about with the federal government, NPR just isn't high up there. What have we wasted on the Iraq war? Afghanistan? Bail outs? Much much much more than NPR. It's like being thousands of dollars in debt and saving a few pennies. Sure, you saved a few pennies and that is nice; but it hasn't done a darn thing for your position. You have to cut more to make better improvements. Like I said, when NPR funding seriously becomes one of my top concerns, we will be in a good place.
 
Mayor Snorkum said:
Support of taxpayer funded (ie, collected under threat of violence) radio is not a libertarian position. People claiming to be libertarian who support such frivolous use of someone else's tax dollars aren't good libertarians.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should read people's opinions before making snarky comments about their political resolve. I don't support NPR, however, it's currently not one of my top concerns. We have so many other places which spend orders of magnitude more than NPR. Cutting some small fraction of a percent of our spending isn't going to do anything for our overall problem. Change can only be made by making significant cuts elsewhere. Perhaps reconsidering our interventionist policies and what they do. Maybe reconsidering all the entitlements and subsidies which go to big corporations and bail outs for companies who acted improperly and broke the system. Yes, in an ideal world I can get all up on my soap box over NPR. Sit here and preach about government propaganda and federally controlled media. But A) we still have significant private press B) we are spending orders of magnitude more money on a plethora of other useless programs and government giveaways. When NPR becomes a major concern, we're sitting pretty because we won't be wasting billions even trillions elsewhere.
 
tryreading said:
Okay, no problem. And you pay for the things you agree with. If those are Iraq and Libya, for example, your wallet will empty fast, but for me, NPR and PBS will grow my brain for cheap, cheap. I win.
Click to expand...

There not.......so pay for DNC RADIO/TV INC. with your own money......and then pay for Barack Petroelum Obama's War for Lybian Oil.....since you voted for him.
.
.
.
 
Ikari said:
Maybe you should read people's opinions before making snarky comments about their political resolve. I don't support NPR, however, it's currently not one of my top concerns. We have so many other places which spend orders of magnitude more than NPR. Cutting some small fraction of a percent of our spending isn't going to do anything for our overall problem. Change can only be made by making significant cuts elsewhere. Perhaps reconsidering our interventionist policies and what they do. Maybe reconsidering all the entitlements and subsidies which go to big corporations and bail outs for companies who acted improperly and broke the system. Yes, in an ideal world I can get all up on my soap box over NPR. Sit here and preach about government propaganda and federally controlled media. But A) we still have significant private press B) we are spending orders of magnitude more money on a plethora of other useless programs and government giveaways. When NPR becomes a major concern, we're sitting pretty because we won't be wasting billions even trillions elsewhere.
Click to expand...

.....so just say you completely support eliminating taxpayer funding of DNC TV/RADIO.....and reclaim your libertarianism.
.
.
.
 
Badmutha said:
.....so just say you completely support eliminating taxpayer funding of DNC TV/RADIO.....and reclaim your libertarianism.
.
.
.
Click to expand...

Hahahah, this is quite the retarded comment.
 
I gotta agree with Mr. Badmutha here, Ikari. It's a pretty cut and dry situation from the libertarian perspective. Who cares what NPr is doing? They're funded by taxpayer dollars, they're nonessential, and we're broke. It's a no-brainer. Cut them.

And I say this as a fan of NPR.
 
Guy Incognito said:
I gotta agree with Mr. Badmutha here, Ikari. It's a pretty cut and dry situation from the libertarian perspective. Who cares what NPr is doing? They're funded by taxpayer dollars, they're nonessential, and we're broke. It's a no-brainer. Cut them.

And I say this as a fan of NPR.
Click to expand...

And I'll say the same thing I've said before. READ WHAT I WROTE! Is that a tough thing to do? Is it not something within people's capabilities? Or is it too time consuming? Because you could save yourself a lot of time and embarrassment by ACTUALLY READING instead of assuming. But do as you want. If you choose not to read and post from ignorance; that's your prerogative.
 
Ikari said:
And I'll say the same thing I've said before. READ WHAT I WROTE! Is that a tough thing to do? Is it not something within people's capabilities? Or is it too time consuming? Because you could save yourself a lot of time and embarrassment by ACTUALLY READING instead of assuming. But do as you want. If you choose not to read and post from ignorance; that's your prerogative.
Click to expand...

I read what you wrote. You're punting on the NPR defunding issue; you're calling it minor. It is minor, but the fact that it isn't a major issue does not mean it should just be left alone. It's so minor that the answer is clear. Cut it.
 
Guy Incognito said:
I read what you wrote. You're punting on the NPR defunding issue; you're calling it minor. It is minor, but the fact that it isn't a major issue does not mean it should just be left alone. It's so minor that the answer is clear. Cut it.
Click to expand...

I said I do not support it. It is however a zero issue. It will have NO affect on the overall system as it stands. It is pointless to argue zero effects. We have to argue the bigger effects, we have to tackle the bigger effects to gain any ground. Cut NPR. But what's it gonna do? Not a damned thing. Meanwhile we spent decades worth of NPR funding blowing up pieces of Libya. We've given tons in bailouts, spent trillion in wars that are undeclared and still going on, our own government is ridiculously corrupt and getting out of control. But by all means, bitch about NPR. Join in the deflection and stop thinking about the problems at hand.

If you want to fix the Republic, you MUST prioritize the concerns. You MUST address the large concerns first before they become even larger and even more out of control. Getting bogged down in zero effects is stupid and damaging to the effort to restore the Republic. Humans have advanced brains capable of understanding a wide array of problems and ideals. It's time to start using it.
 
Guy Incognito said:
I gotta agree with Mr. Badmutha here, Ikari. It's a pretty cut and dry situation from the libertarian perspective. Who cares what NPr is doing? They're funded by taxpayer dollars, they're nonessential, and we're broke. It's a no-brainer. Cut them.

And I say this as a fan of NPR.
Click to expand...

Truer words were never spoken......
.
.
.
 
Sure, let us go ahead and de-fund that which provides the highest educational content on television and increase funding for oh.....say....... Corporate Welfare, so that McDonald's can say......oh......I don't know......... study the effects of serving Chicken McNuggets to swamp rats in Mississippi, or something equally as ludicrous.

Typically, American these days. I'm not surprised by the vote. But, hey - why not. We've been "de-funding" our school systems across the county for decades now - why not take out PBS while we're at it.

Maybe we can use the savings to bring back old episodes of Bonanza and run it in a prime-time slot. I'm sure that's a good replacement for PBS.
 
They need to be cut...period. So what if Inez from BFE Nebraska isn't going to see Sesame Street. Cut it yesterday!
 
Guy Incognito said:
I gotta agree with Mr. Badmutha here, Ikari. It's a pretty cut and dry situation from the libertarian perspective. Who cares what NPr is doing? They're funded by taxpayer dollars, they're nonessential, and we're broke. It's a no-brainer. Cut them.

And I say this as a fan of NPR.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't utility trump ideology sometimes? That kind of "no-brainer" checklist... If something is working, why mess that up? What about the "doing the best job possible" perspective?

Also, I'd have to disagree with the essentialness. In the age of pundits and entertainment news, an actual source of information that doesn't have a financial stake in promoting a viewpoint is pretty essential.
 
Paschendale said:
Shouldn't utility trump ideology sometimes? That kind of "no-brainer" checklist... If something is working, why mess that up? What about the "doing the best job possible" perspective?

Also, I'd have to disagree with the essentialness. In the age of pundits and entertainment news, an actual source of information that doesn't have a financial stake in promoting a viewpoint is pretty essential.
Click to expand...

Has no financial stake? Then what are we arguing about? NPR has no financial stake in keeping the government happy.
 
Patrickt said:
Has no financial stake? Then what are we arguing about? NPR has no financial stake in keeping the government happy.
Click to expand...

One really has to wonder what we're arguing about. This is a zero issue. Given the size and scope of our current government and its policies, axing NPR and PBS will do nothing to solve any of our problems or make even a noticeable difference in the actual dynamics of the system. I think it's very pointless at this stage to argue over cutting NPR and PBS because there are so many other, greater problems that have to be addressed before addressing NPR and PBS will have any measurable affect.

Also, I think Pashendale brings up a good point. The press is a tool of the People by which they can accurately gauge the activities and intent of government so that we may better control it. Our press is broken. Now is the real solution government sponsored media? No, I don't think that will do anything. It has a possibility of it, but you would need to be very careful in how you set the system up to ensure that way. The better method would be if we would stop consuming this crappy, dishonest method of entertainment news we've currently adopted. It does not behoove us to allow our press to act improperly towards their duties to us.
 
PW4000 said:
Sure, let us go ahead and de-fund that which provides the highest educational content on television and increase funding for oh.....say....... Corporate Welfare, so that McDonald's can say......oh......I don't know......... study the effects of serving Chicken McNuggets to swamp rats in Mississippi, or something equally as ludicrous.
Click to expand...

Crazy idea here......but if you support DNC TV/RADIO.....try using your wallet for once....mine needs a break....thanks!

Typically, American these days. I'm not surprised by the vote. But, hey - why not. We've been "de-funding" our school systems across the county for decades now - why not take out PBS while we're at it.
Click to expand...

International20Education20Spending20Data_Image.png



Maybe we can use the savings to bring back old episodes of Bonanza and run it in a prime-time slot. I'm sure that's a good replacement for PBS.
Click to expand...

Im sure the 12 people that watch PBS and 7 people that listen to NPR will find a way to survive....somehow....
.
.
.
 
Ikari said:
One really has to wonder what we're arguing about.
Click to expand...

Indeed....anyone with one Libertarian bone in their body......would support cutting all funding to DNC TV/RADIO......yesterday.

The journey of 14 Trillion miles begins with the first step.....and Democrats and Faux Libertarians cant get past Cowboy Poetry Contests nor DNC TV.
.
.
.
 
Bigfoot 88 said:
In common sense terms-Liberal
Click to expand...

By not conservative, options include centrist, moderate, libertarian, liberal, fascist, socialist, communist, constitutionalist, theocratic, etc. I find it interesting that you have such a one or the other view.
 
Badmutha said:
Indeed....anyone with one Libertarian bone in their body......would support cutting all funding to DNC TV/RADIO......yesterday.

The journey of 14 Trillion miles begins with the first step.....and Democrats and Faux Libertarians cant get past Cowboy Poetry Contests nor DNC TV.
.
.
.
Click to expand...

Oh there you go again, trying to insult my political lean with your predetermined stereotypes on what I'm supposed to feel and how I'm supposed to act. Sorry, you ain't god. I'm a realist, I want change that changes things. I want to bring the government under control, limit its actions, decrease its spending. But those must be done in real terms. Cutting something which is fractions of a percent is not going to do anything to solve the problem. The best it can do is provide distraction from the other problems which need to be addressed. I'll cut NPR when NPR will change something. It will be nice if we get to that point. Till then, trillions on a war and you want to moan about one molecule of water in the sea.
 
StillBallin75 said:
So liberal essentially means anything that's not conservative. Got it. Pretty exclusive club yall got goin down there.
Click to expand...

NPR has a fairly liberal lean. And is f'n boring!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom