• 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
See, now in Barb's comments she throws out a reasonable question. She may or may not be right about the effects of defunding PBS/NPR, but the question of what I am willing to cut is a fair one. Then of course we have those on the other side of the isle, instead of waiting for an answer, have to build their elaborate straw men that have no basis in reality, and of course they think they somehow made a point, when the reality is all they did was look dishonest.

Barb, an honest answer for an honest question: "... what are they going to be willing to cut at all?"

Anything and everything. Note that there is a difference between cut and defund entirely. Want to cut PBS/NPR/CPB by 10 % along with a program of cuts, I would be smack dab alongside that. Want to trim defense spending by pushing for more efficiency? Sure, base closure commissions from Bush the elder and Clinton's time period are saving us a ton of money now and did not reduce military readiness. Trim everything, as much as you can. The problem is that republicans and democrats are trying to cut based on their partisan beliefs, and with no willingness to compromise much, which means no cuts will happen, and both sides can blame the other(and both sides know that their path leads to no cuts).

See, the reality is not at all like Ockham and X Factor are great examples of why there will probably be very few actual cuts this year. Instead of wanting to come up with a plan, to them it's just scoring points. They would rather score political points than actually get something accomplished. They are a part of the problem, not the solution.

Bringing this back to public broadcasting, I don't think any one is saying they should be immune to cuts. They are fair game for cuts just the same as any one else. However, what is going on has nothing to do with the deficit. NPR/PBS is not a significant factor in that. Claiming that the efforts to defund them are an effort to reduce the debt is laughable. Creating a package of a number of programs, some popular with the left, some with the right, reducing funding by say 10 % to all of them is something that could save more money, and actually pass and get signed by the president. That is a real solution.

Reasonable points. But from my perspective they are missing the bigger picture of the standoff we are in regarding our ongoing federal spending habits/disaster.

There are those defending spending on the smaller non-life impacting luxury items like PBS/NPR. Saying it is insignificant to the to the bigger impact of tackling the entitlements. (which certainly is mathematically accurate)

But as soon as proposals for cuts to the Social Security and Medicare entitlements enter the equation, we can rest assured that there will be screams about federal funding to PBS/NPR and any other federal programs that are much lower priorities.

Believe most agree that Federal spending is out of control and unsustainable. This isn't about love/hate of public broadcasting. It is about first establishing priorities and then working our way down through all spending.

There are a lot of federal expenditures that are not a priority. Funding PBS is not high on the priority list.


.
 
Right now Les Miserables is on PBS. How else would this glorious music be accessible to everyone. Listening to it on CD is just not the same. What a loss PBS and NPR would be.
Quite possibly my favorite book and the very best of authors.
I've read Les Miserables more than three times - the utmost in compliments.
The quality of programming on PBS is at a level far above commercial ad-ridden TV.
 
Right now Les Miserables is on PBS. How else would this glorious music be accessible to everyone. Listening to it on CD is just not the same. What a loss PBS and NPR would be.

/facepalm

Once again, defunding PBS doesn't mean they would be taken off the air. If you'd like to donate to that channel, go for it. Why should everyone be forced to pay for a TV station??
 
I got curious about the influence large donors would have on NPR. Here's a sample of what I found on what I found on George Soros.

George Soros hid huge donations to NPR « George Soros « Back to Basics
She also noted that Mr. Soros’s foundation first contributed to NPR in 2000 and that some of the money went to fund a documentary critical of the death penalty as it’s employed in Texas. It aired on October 12, 2000, a day after then-Texas Governor George W. Bush was questioned about the death penalty in a debate with Democratic candidate Al Gore. . .
.

This is just a fraction of positive reporting on NPR for George Soros.

He is definately getting a big microphone for his generous donations through the years.

Soros Uses Leverage To Aid New York Children : NPR
Soros: Financial Crisis Stems from 'Super-Bubble' : NPR
George Soros : NPR
Soros: Damn The Cutbacks, Full Speed Ahead! : NPR
Soros Donates $100 Million To Human Rights Watch : NPR
Fox News 'Nazi' Rhetoric Starts At The Top : NPR
Soros Would Make It Harder For People Like Him To Make Billions : The Two-Way : NPR
'Soros Lectures' Shares Wisdom, Criticisms : NPR
Soros: Economy Bumps Bottom But Faces Lengthy Slow Growth : The Two-Way : NPR
Soros: Bigger Fund Needed For Poor Nations To Reduce Greenhouse Gases : The Two-Way : NPR
Soros: It's Time To Rethink Economics : Planet Money : NPR
George Soros, Maintaining Political Interest : NPR
George Soros on 'The Age of Fallibility' : NPR
 
NPR/PBS is not funded by the government they get some of their funding from the government. There is a huge difference. Part of the greatness of NPR comes from the fact that it is not biased by a corporate owner. Both are the best source of in depth, unbiased news. PBS provides so much educational programing for families and for schools. They both deserve all the support they can get.

Is this show still on PBS?
» Indoctrinating Children With Global Warming TV Shows, Movies and Books - Blogger News Network
Politico.com found Mitchell Kriegman, the creator of the eco-friendly PBS program
It isn’t just environut stuff, either. A whole raft of anti-capitalist and secular humanist ideas are pushed on kids with this show and other media, such as movies and kid’s books. In one episode of “It’s a Big World” for instance, the main character even tells the kids that they are not any more special than animals, saying to them, “Hey, did you know that you are an animal, too?”
No, Snook, our children are not “animals,” they are people!
Even more ridiculously, this Kriegman is so sure that his zealous positions are just a fact that he doesn’t even seem to realize that he is pushing his politics on our children.
“There’s no controversy for kids,” said Kriegman. “It’s not a political issue.”
Well, it SHOULDN’T be, I’ll grant him that. But he has made it so by pushing his secular humanism and unproven globaloney ideology on unsuspecting children and their parents.
 
/facepalm

Once again, defunding PBS doesn't mean they would be taken off the air. If you'd like to donate to that channel, go for it. Why should everyone be forced to pay for a TV station??

National character.
 
.

This is just a fraction of positive reporting on NPR for George Soros.

As opposed to all the negative press Rupert Murdoch gets on Fox...

Yes, NPR doesn't badmouth it's donors. Just sounds smart to me, especially if you'd like them to stay your donors.
 
See, now in Barb's comments she throws out a reasonable question. She may or may not be right about the effects of defunding PBS/NPR, but the question of what I am willing to cut is a fair one. Then of course we have those on the other side of the isle, instead of waiting for an answer, have to build their elaborate straw men that have no basis in reality, and of course they think they somehow made a point, when the reality is all they did was look dishonest.

Barb, an honest answer for an honest question: "... what are they going to be willing to cut at all?"

Anything and everything. Note that there is a difference between cut and defund entirely. Want to cut PBS/NPR/CPB by 10 % along with a program of cuts, I would be smack dab alongside that. Want to trim defense spending by pushing for more efficiency? Sure, base closure commissions from Bush the elder and Clinton's time period are saving us a ton of money now and did not reduce military readiness. Trim everything, as much as you can. The problem is that republicans and democrats are trying to cut based on their partisan beliefs, and with no willingness to compromise much, which means no cuts will happen, and both sides can blame the other(and both sides know that their path leads to no cuts).

See, the reality is not at all like Ockham and X Factor are great examples of why there will probably be very few actual cuts this year. Instead of wanting to come up with a plan, to them it's just scoring points. They would rather score political points than actually get something accomplished. They are a part of the problem, not the solution.

Bringing this back to public broadcasting, I don't think any one is saying they should be immune to cuts. They are fair game for cuts just the same as any one else. However, what is going on has nothing to do with the deficit. NPR/PBS is not a significant factor in that. Claiming that the efforts to defund them are an effort to reduce the debt is laughable. Creating a package of a number of programs, some popular with the left, some with the right, reducing funding by say 10 % to all of them is something that could save more money, and actually pass and get signed by the president. That is a real solution.

I think the things that can be defunded with the least amount of pain, should be. I think thinks like PBS,NPR,NEA fit that category. Others need to be cut a certain percentage even if it will hurt some people. The WIC program and Headstart are two really good proprams that are supposedly getting cut some. This kind of stuff has to be done. I really don't see much sense in just cutting some from the ones that are not needed. Just get rid of them all together.
 
Let's pause the debate for a second. I have a question: Has anyone here listened/watched NPR/PBS within the last, say, two-three weeks?

I need to know this because some people here have admitted that they listened/watched years ago. If that is the case, then wait until tomorrow and legitimately watch PBS, then get back to me.
 
I'm sorry?.....

I know. It's okay.
:2razz::2razz:





We better ourselves by holding excellence and intellect in high esteem.

Our country worships undereducated, semi-literate athletes... and pro-wrestlers.

A populist movement thriving on anti-intellectualism, lead by people proud not to read.

PBS and NPR represent a place where art and intellect are preserved. By publicly funding them, we sustain our national integrity and character.
 
Last edited:
Let's pause the debate for a second. I have a question: Has anyone here listened/watched NPR/PBS within the last, say, two-three weeks?

I need to know this because some people here have admitted that they listened/watched years ago. If that is the case, then wait until tomorrow and legitimately watch PBS, then get back to me.

I just listened to Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me this morning on NPR and Les Miz in Concert last week on PBS.
 


Its a completely unbiased news network.......and a great reason to fleece Taxpayers......
.
.
.
 
/facepalm

Once again, defunding PBS doesn't mean they would be taken off the air. If you'd like to donate to that channel, go for it. Why should everyone be forced to pay for a TV station??


Look at the crap people do watch and what is provided by the commercial networks. We need NPR/PBS and we need to support it. I send my money. The money saved by defunding them is not worth the risk that they would change.
 
Look at the crap people do watch and what is provided by the commercial networks. We need NPR/PBS and we need to support it. I send my money. The money saved by defunding them is not worth the risk that they would change.
NPR is unconstitutional and should be thrown out into the private sector and quit raping me for that dollar they need to attempt to tell me a bunch of bull**** I have no interest in.
 
Look at the crap people do watch and what is provided by the commercial networks. We need NPR/PBS and we need to support it. I send my money. The money saved by defunding them is not worth the risk that they would change.

So how about you and your liberal friends who all just love DNC TV/RADIO support it........and quit relying on the overburdened taxpayers in this country. Our wallets need a break.......thanks!
.
.
.
.
 
Let's pause the debate for a second. I have a question: Has anyone here listened/watched NPR/PBS within the last, say, two-three weeks?

I need to know this because some people here have admitted that they listened/watched years ago. If that is the case, then wait until tomorrow and legitimately watch PBS, then get back to me.

I listen to NPR every day. If I miss shows I like, I listen to them as podcasts. I don't watch PBS as often but I just watched it tonight. I have the PBS app on my phone.
 
I listen to NPR every day. If I miss shows I like, I listen to them as podcasts. I don't watch PBS as often but I just watched it tonight. I have the PBS app on my phone.
and now for NPR theme



actually it ain't bad.
 


Its a completely unbiased news network.......and a great reason to fleece Taxpayers......
.
.
.


1995 - really we're going back that far. OK, that was a nasty thing to say but she didn't say it on the station. She also apologized for it. Is she the only public person to say something they shouldn't have? Heck, Glenn Beck does it every day.
 
So how about you and your liberal friends who all just love DNC TV/RADIO support it........and quit relying on the overburdened taxpayers in this country. Our wallets need a break.......thanks!
.
.
.
.

Your wallet needs a break from the fraction of a cent that NPR gets? Wow! This idea that PBS/NPR is biased is ridiculous. It's sad when honest truth is considered bias. Both networks build our national culture unlike the other networks who seem more interested in tearing it down. If I hear the name Snookie one more time...
 
1995 - really we're going back that far. OK, that was a nasty thing to say but she didn't say it on the station. She also apologized for it. Is she the only public person to say something they shouldn't have? Heck, Glenn Beck does it every day.

Except Glenn Beck isnt a recipient of US Tax dollars......

.....

.....is 2 weeks ago sufficient?
.
.
 
Your wallet needs a break from the fraction of a cent that NPR gets? Wow! This idea that PBS/NPR is biased is ridiculous. It's sad when honest truth is considered bias. Both networks build our national culture unlike the other networks who seem more interested in tearing it down. If I hear the name Snookie one more time...

.....this is why Democrats cant bring themselves to even cut a Cowboy Poetry Contest.......why this country faces massive debt and deficit......why this country is destined for Bankruptcy.....because of this liberal attitude of "Well its only (insert any number) million/billion taxpayer dollars".
.
.
.
 
Back
Top Bottom