Update:
Predictably, we lost this one in the House: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/03/us-house-votes-to-cut-npr-funding.html
"Under the guise of saving taxpayer dollars what they're doing is silencing NPR -- not because it saves money, but because it is not on the same ideological frequency of the extreme right," said Rep. John Larson, D-Conn.
Fortunately: The legislation passed Thursday faces an uphill climb in the Senate, where the Democratic majority is likely to oppose it.
Posts
2 comments:
There is probably some truth that NPR is in trouble for its political views--but there's also an argument that it shouldn't be publicly funded regardless of its views. I regularly listen to NPR and NPR podcasts--Fresh Air, Car Talk and This American Life are great shows. I've donated and will likely donate again--but I don't think it should get tax money.
Same goes for Planned Parenthood--I've donated more to them than any other charity, still don't think they should get government funding. Whether or not an organization is a good one that deserves voluntary contributions is a separate argument from whether they deserve involuntary contributions.
Sevesteen,
I looked into my crystal ball and knew this was coming or that this would be your stance--no tax money for NPR.
And I get that and part of me thinks so, too, actually.
But the fact is, if they aren't there to do the research on the corporations and government, both, there's a great deal of information about the two of them we won't get.
I'd rather pay some taxes to keep an eye on those two so we know what to work against and what they're doing than to not pay those taxes and have that go away.
Living in the dark doesn't appeal to me.
And Planned Parenthood?
Sure, that fits this country. It helps mostly the middle- and lower-classes so cut it. That's the American way. And yes I'm being sarcastic but there's a great deal of truth to it, sadly, frustratingly. I'm not mocking you but this country and it's attitude toward anyone without wherewithal.
Post a Comment