CSNbbs

Interesting piece. Play the program using the controls towards the top of the page.
http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/2011/03/25/03

In these forums no response is good. :)

(04-02-2011 12:12 AM)niuguy Wrote: [ -> ]In these forums no response is good. :)

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

GO HUSKIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (and go NPR!!!!!!!!!!!!)

(04-02-2011 12:12 AM)niuguy Wrote: [ -> ]In these forums no response is good. :)

Kind of tough to find 18 mins to listen to it. Actually I am not surprised at all by the findings. I have a lot of conservative friends who listen to and enjoy NPR. Their issue is not with any perceived bias but the whole idea of NPR. I would expect that a true conservative would still be pushing for de-funding even if NPR were akin to Fox in their views.

(04-02-2011 10:18 AM)BobL Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-02-2011 12:12 AM)niuguy Wrote: [ -> ]In these forums no response is good. :)

Kind of tough to find 18 mins to listen to it. Actually I am not surprised at all by the findings. I have a lot of conservative friends who listen to and enjoy NPR. Their issue is not with any perceived bias but the whole idea of NPR. I would expect that a true conservative would still be pushing for de-funding even if NPR were akin to Fox in their views.

True, people do prefer their 30 second sound bites and talking heads...or somebody crying wolf. Dont want to actually THINK about anything...

(04-03-2011 12:39 AM)niuguy Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-02-2011 10:18 AM)BobL Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-02-2011 12:12 AM)niuguy Wrote: [ -> ]In these forums no response is good. :)

Kind of tough to find 18 mins to listen to it. Actually I am not surprised at all by the findings. I have a lot of conservative friends who listen to and enjoy NPR. Their issue is not with any perceived bias but the whole idea of NPR. I would expect that a true conservative would still be pushing for de-funding even if NPR were akin to Fox in their views.

True, people do prefer their 30 second sound bites and talking heads...or somebody crying wolf. Dont want to actually THINK about anything...

I'll say it again, if we can't cut things like NPR and PBS from the budget this country is going to go bankrupt. There is absolutely no reason the government - and therefore taxpayers - should be funding these type of operations. These are the relatively simple cuts to make - if people can't agree on this how will we ever agree on the much more difficult decisions?

Rock Bottom.. This has nothing to do with the budget. Just stop it. You could fund 200 NPR's and not be any worse off.

If you really care about the budget, it's not hard. Stop cutting taxes for the rich, and stop wasting so much money on wars we have no business being in, and we'd be fine (or in simpler terms, go back to how it was under Clinton, ya know, when our government wasn't bankrupt, stunning I know, but his higher taxes for the rich didn't ruin the economy or bring down the wealthy in this country).

It's a relatively simple cut to make because it's irrelevant to the budget either way. It's not a budget issue, it's a political talking point that the right grabbed on to because it's scored them some points in the ratings.

The fact is th NPR/PBS funding issue is merely another talking point with no real substance.
NPR and PBS would probably survive without federal funding so, cut it

NPR would survive but not the rural radio stations the subsidization exists for.

(04-04-2011 03:10 PM)BobL Wrote: [ -> ]The fact is th NPR/PBS funding issue is merely another talking point with no real substance.
NPR and PBS would probably survive without federal funding so, cut it

To me the question doesn't even come down to the saving as much as the fact that I don't think the federal Government should be in the business of funding things like NPR and PBS in the first place. And there are probably a thousand other things that get funded that shouldn't be. But to paraphrase Senator Dirksen, a million here and a million there and pretty soon we are talking about real money. Let's cut all the crap we don't need to fund - no matter how small - so we can properly fund the stuff the federal government should be doing -but doing at a reasonable level. (For example, we must cut military spending - it's going to drive us to ruin just as it did the USSR; you'd have thought we'd have learned a lesson from that.)

(04-04-2011 08:59 PM)Rock Bottom Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-04-2011 03:10 PM)BobL Wrote: [ -> ]The fact is th NPR/PBS funding issue is merely another talking point with no real substance.
NPR and PBS would probably survive without federal funding so, cut it

To me the question doesn't even come down to the saving as much as the fact that I don't think the federal Government should be in the business of funding things like NPR and PBS in the first place. And there are probably a thousand other things that get funded that shouldn't be. But to paraphrase Senator Dirksen, a million here and a million there and pretty soon we are talking about real money. Let's cut all the crap we don't need to fund - no matter how small - so we can properly fund the stuff the federal government should be doing -but doing at a reasonable level. (For example, we must cut military spending - it's going to drive us to ruin just as it did the USSR; you'd have thought we'd have learned a lesson from that.)

You must have been listening to NPR as the Dirksen quote was given by one of the panelists/reporters yesterday.

GO HUSKIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How can you even talk about military spending and NPR in the same sentence. One actually matters to our budget. One most certainly does not.

(04-05-2011 09:08 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote: [ -> ]How can you even talk about military spending and NPR in the same sentence. One actually matters to our budget. One most certainly does not.

Also, one is specificly outlined in our Constitution and the other is not.

You're right.. that part about needing more air craft carriers in service than the rest of world combined. That requirement to spend double on our military over the next highest spender so we can police the world and invade other countries with out cause. Clearly what they had in mind when they put the constitution together.

(04-05-2011 09:04 AM)pantone1935 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-04-2011 08:59 PM)Rock Bottom Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-04-2011 03:10 PM)BobL Wrote: [ -> ]The fact is th NPR/PBS funding issue is merely another talking point with no real substance.
NPR and PBS would probably survive without federal funding so, cut it

To me the question doesn't even come down to the saving as much as the fact that I don't think the federal Government should be in the business of funding things like NPR and PBS in the first place. And there are probably a thousand other things that get funded that shouldn't be. But to paraphrase Senator Dirksen, a million here and a million there and pretty soon we are talking about real money. Let's cut all the crap we don't need to fund - no matter how small - so we can properly fund the stuff the federal government should be doing -but doing at a reasonable level. (For example, we must cut military spending - it's going to drive us to ruin just as it did the USSR; you'd have thought we'd have learned a lesson from that.)

You must have been listening to NPR as the Dirksen quote was given by one of the panelists/reporters yesterday.

GO HUSKIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nope I wasn't, but that's a pretty well known quote I think.