4
Jan
Recently was sent this link:
That’s my image, here’s Townhall’s link. Since I was a young boy, I hated NPR. They’ve had a lifelong history of dumbing down content. If they were reporting a war, you heard incessant gun fire in the background. The noises alone drove me away. It just struck me that they thought the average listener was too stupid to know what war was, so they tossed in sound effects to help. The content never enticed me to stay. Once CNN, Fox, MSNBC, XM, Cable, radio, the internet, and a host of other outlets arose to fill their void, I forgot they even existed. They served no function in my life. And, from what I can gather, the same was true for most of the US.
Originally, President Johnson asserted the charter for CPB, that’s the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, as:
Now, the problem you had in 1967 was a very limited media. Not so much politically, morally, or ethically, but physically. You had radio, and you had broadcast television. That was it. There were basically three channels on television, and depending on your radio, a whole bunch. Probably 20 or so. In 1980, things changed rather dramatically when CNN went on the air. No longer was it safe to assume that only a federally funded quasi-governmental agency would be the only one capable of delivering “good music”, “exciting plays”, or “reporting on the whole fascinating range of human activity”. They definitely got the “reporting on the whole fascinating range of human activity” part down real good. They’re a news company, that’s all they do.
At about the same time, satellite television was in its infancy. For those with S-band dishes, you remember those:
You could get programming from anywhere in the world. Literally. You weren’t tied to the big three any more. I had one of those buggers, I watched NASA real-time. That was cool. Suddenly I was watching R and X rated movies, my whole experience exploded. At that time it became evident to me that there really was no need for NPR, CPB. How did they justify their existence? Folks, that was around 1980 or so.
S-Band begat the Dishnets we know today. Now you’ve got hundreds of channels. Want Education, go to educationtv. Want classical music? Go to one of the several classical channels. Symphony? Broadway? Opera? It’s all there. Concerned what you’re government’s doing? Go to C-Span. The content absolutely overwhelms what CPB was chartered to do. The purpose for CPB obviously no longer exists.
So, given the obvious eliminated need for CPB, what would you expect happened to its funding?
Funny you should ask:
| Year | Allocation | Change |
| 1969 | $5,000,000.00 | |
| 1970 | $15,000,000.00 | 200% |
| 1971 | $23,000,000.00 | 53% |
| 1972 | $35,000,000.00 | 52% |
| 1973 | $35,000,000.00 | 0% |
| 1974 | $50,000,000.00 | 43% |
| 1975 | $62,000,000.00 | 24% |
| 1976 | $78,500,000.00 | 27% |
| 1977 | $103,000,000.00 | 31% |
| 1978 | $119,200,000.00 | 16% |
| 1979 | $120,200,000.00 | 1% |
| 1980 | $152,000,000.00 | 26% |
| 1981 | $162,000,000.00 | 7% |
| 1982 | $172,000,000.00 | 6% |
| 1983 | $137,000,000.00 | -20% |
| 1984 | $137,500,000.00 | 0% |
| 1985 | $150,500,000.00 | 9% |
| 1986 | $159,500,000.00 | 6% |
| 1987 | $200,000,000.00 | 25% |
| 1988 | $214,000,000.00 | 7% |
| 1989 | $228,000,000.00 | 7% |
| 1990 | $229,400,000.00 | 1% |
| 1991 | $298,900,000.00 | 30% |
| 1992 | $327,300,000.00 | 10% |
| 1993 | $318,600,000.00 | -3% |
| 1994 | $275,000,000.00 | -14% |
| 1995 | $285,600,000.00 | 4% |
| 1996 | $275,000,000.00 | -4% |
| 1997 | $260,000,000.00 | -5% |
| 1998 | $250,000,000.00 | -4% |
| 1999 | $250,000,000.00 | 0% |
| 2000 | $300,000,000.00 | 20% |
| 2001 | $340,000,000.00 | 13% |
| 2002 | $350,000,000.00 | 3% |
| 2003 | $362,800,000.00 | 4% |
| 2004 | $377,800,000.00 | 4% |
| 2005 | $386,800,000.00 | 2% |
| 2006 | $396,000,000.00 | 2% |
| 2007 | $400,000,000.00 | 1% |
| 2008 | $393,000,000.00 | -2% |
| 2009 | $400,000,000.00 | 2% |
| 2010 | $420,000,000.00 | 5% |
| 2011 | $430,000,000.00 | 2% |
| 2012 | $445,000,000.00 | 3% |
| $10,129,600,000.00 | 8800% |
Yup, it just keeps growing and growing. Then came the news that George Soros donated a LOT of money to NPR. They then promptly fired Juan Williams. He was the only remotely conservative spokesperson at NPR. They reason they fired Williams? For expressing an opinion. That used to be considered an exciting human activity. What it did now was assure the planet that CPB no longer cared about their charter. They only cared about appeasing their base. And, that base neither represents the public interest, nor even the US citizens’ interest. It only represents the internal philosophy of the people running NPR. That’s it. That makes it no different than MSNBC, CNN, or any of the other hard left propaganda tools George Soros employs. Someone tell me what the point of NPR existing at this point is. I really see absolutely none whatsoever. The history you’ll find on the History channel. The music’s all over Sirius/XM.
Then came the internet.
They really no longer need to exist.
They certainly do not need to be contributing to the national debt.
John Boehner wants ideas, listen to Darrell Issa. Defund NPR, no one will notice.
28
Jan
This weekend there was a rally in Washington, DC. It was a pro-life rally. There was also a counter-protest of abortion supporters. CNN reported:
According to Rick Sanchez, both sides were represented. He couldn’t really tell which side was best represented. He was standing in a crowd of about 300,000 pro-lifers and a couple of dozen pro-abortion supporters. He then added:
The “bulk” was 99.99%. I’m not advocating one side or the other. What I am advocating is for media to get it right. CNN just can’t help themselves. They need to. Most of the polarization in this country is illustrated by CNN’s inability to report anything positive on a political position they can’t support. They can’t have two sides to any issue. That inability to accept what they don’t like is the problem in this country right now. This was a pro-life rally. Anyone would expect a huge majority supporting a cause to be at their own rally. Usually there will be a contingent counter-protesting. That’s the norm. This rally fit the norm. Rich Sanchez can’t even accept what is the norm. Pathetic.
HT: CMCSand
23
Nov
Lou Dobbs is pondering running for president apparently. He already has a website: http://www.loudobbsforpresident.org. Well, “someone” has one for him anyways. And, he’s not denying he’s interested. So far he seems to be a one issue candidate. But, since it’s kinda early, and he’s not officially running, that’s hardly a strike. That one issue is one that can generate a lot of support. What I find most odd about the draft Dobbs page is this initial paragraph:
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) is mobilizing activists and groups across America to defend CNN host Lou Dobbs and all First Amendment rights from attacks launched by illegal alien and Obama supporting organizations such as La Raza, Media Matters, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Associated Press.”
That’s supposed to be reserved for anti-American Christian redneck Republicans. L0u Dobbs may be Christian. The rest, not so much. Well, he was born in Texas, so that should count. But, he left there. He seems quite patriotic, but attended college in Moscow. So he’s got a couple of things going for him. But, since he’s been at CNN for thirty years, I couldn’t possibly like him. CNN bit the radical liberal pill in the 90′s and pretty much drove the country into the partisan bickering to levels never known to man before. Well, OK, so Dobbs left CNN for that reason in 1999. But, I gotta admit, he’s got one huge thing going for him:
He left CNN to help start up space.com. But, in the long run, space.com’s done for astronomy what CNN did for political commentary.
To say the least, he presents an unusual political conundrum. I like that. What I like most is when people who make their living criticizing and second guessing politicians put their money where their mouth is.
They’re calling in the SEIU of course. The advantages of this of course are obvious:
- They’re already organized and staffed.
- You don’t have to worry about paying them since they’re on salary.
- If you’re a Democrat, you don’t have to question their loyalty.
- You don’t have to worry about explaining what the issue is.
- You don’t have to worry about CNN or MSNBC questioning why unions are beating up people at town halls.
- You don’t have to worry about the ACLU worrying about people’s rights being violated.
- Since they don’t wear swastikas, that means they’re OK with Nancy Pelosi, Whoopi Goldberg, Dick Durbin, Keith Olbermann, George Soros, or anyone else that might fear a mindless organized mob attacking at the behest of a political leader.
The list is practically endless.
This is precious. Dick Durbin is convinced all of the very vocal opposition to health care reform as it’s been sort of, well not really, presented, is orchestrated by one Texas lobbyist.
For some inexplicable reason, CNN edited out the “Texas lobbyist” part. But, others have it. He made that comment while debating the town hall meetings against John Cornyn. He is of course, a Senator from Texas.
I have to admit, I had never heard the term “birther” before. I don’t watch tv much, so I guess that’s why. Dictionary.com doesn’t have a clue what “birther” is either. So, whenever a word is used I don’t know and dictionary.com doesn’t either, I go to urbandictionary.com. They of course have it. According to them, birther has several definitions:
- A conspiracy theorist who believes that Barack Obama is ineligible for the Presidency of the United States, based on any number of claims related to his place of birth, birth certificate, favorite birthday, or whether or not he has heard the song Africa by Toto. “Did you know that Barack Obama’s parents concealed the location of his birth because they knew he would grow up to be President? What? Of course it makes sense, I’m a birther!” barack obama president birth conspiracy Brent Elliott, Dec 8, 2008
- A racist sore loser who can’t deal with having a black president so they make up absurd conspiracy theories about Barack Obama’s birth certificate. These nutjobs actually believe that there has been a conspiracy going back 48 years to fake Barack Obama’s birth certificate. Apparently they had a crystal ball and knew that this black child (born in the days of segregation) would someday run for President. “Just ignore that racist nutjob foaming at the mouth. He’s a right wing birther conspiracy nut. gop racist bedwetter nazi klansman self-hating-gay, scoobydubious, Jul 16, 2009
- A person who believes that Barack Obama has controversy and/or fraud surrounding his birth, though all theories have been either rejected or proved false. The birthers gathered on the steps of the Supreme Court – all 20 of them. http://hotair.com/archives/2008/12/09/birthers-get-another-lifeline/
- A redneck born on American soil in a barn delivered by a drunken veterinarian who also performs abortions. Parents are both American citizens who are usually first cousins if not brother and sister. Birthers fought for their right to marry their cousins. hillbilly redneck birth conspiracy obama
by billthecat, Jul 28, 2009 - A knuckle dragging gutter culture warrior related to tea bagging citizens who don’t want to pay taxes because they don’t support our troops. “Obama’s parents were so smart they planned 50 years ago to have a baby on foreign land and get him elected into the White House so he can raise taxes to pay for our troops. It’s true I am a tea bagging birther” What were those tea bagging protesters complaining about again? Ohh yay they refuse to accept a black man as president and now have resorted to saying Obama can not be president cause he is an illegal alien. Sounds crazy? No I am just a tea bagging “birther.” teabagging obama birther conspiracy nutjob troop hater knuckle dragging
- A term for the frothy liquid mixture formed in the vagina when a baby is born. It is a foul smelling combination of maternal blood, vernix, and meconium (baby poop) that drips down over the mother’s anus during the third stage of labor. It is thought to be a contraction of the words “birth” and “lather.”, “Nurse, would you please wipe that birther off the crack of my patient’s ass? asshole dumbfuck idiot racistfool
by drsteevo, Jul 28, 2009 - Jargon term, or buzz word used by mainstream media to discredit, and marginalize the legal battle of Philip Berg, a registered democrat operating out of PA. The term was most recently pegged in an attempt to divide, a bi-partisan investigation into the legitimacy of Barack H Obama’s Presidency. If you don’t like mafia leaders, and respect the rule of law, then you are a birther.
So, after seeing that list of definitions submitted by what has to be respected observers of the United States version of the English language, it’s no wonder Eugene Robinson at RealClearPolitics thinks so lowly of birthers as well. He’s a little more kindly, simply calling them “nutjobs” in his opinion piece entitled “The Berserk Birthers”.
Now, this is where it gets kind of crazy for me:
Also beyond the Outer Limits of sanity is CNN anchor Lou Dobbs, who has been giving prime-time exposure to the “birther” lunacy — even while denying that he believes in it. Dobbs’ obsession with the “story” has become an embarrassment to the network, which has tried to position itself as untainted by political bias. CNN/U.S. President Jon Klein has pronounced the story “dead,” but insists that it’s legitimate for Dobbs to examine the alleged controversy, though in fact no controversy exists.
CNN untainted by political bias? Wow! Now THAT’S out there! That’s berserk! That’s something only a nutjob could believe. It gets even better:
Is this an orchestrated campaign to somehow delegitimize Obama’s presidency? Is the fact that he is the first African-American president a factor? Is it that some people can’t or won’t accept that he won the election and serves as commander in chief?
Maybe, maybe not. Trying to analyze the “birther” phenomenon would mean taking it seriously, and taking it seriously would be like arguing about the color of unicorns. About all that can be said is that a bunch of lost, confused and frightened people have decided to seek refuge in conspiratorial make-believe. I hope they’re harmless. And I hope they seek help.
Now, it’s impossible for me to buy for one second CNN ever concerned itself about being unbiased in this last election. I’ve got an entire thread on this blog dedicated to news media political bias, and CNN is all over it. It goes back almost five years of documented cases of bias most usually with documentation proving that bias.
So, here’s the rub I have with this article by Eugene Robinson, if the argument against something neither cites evidence disproving the original argument and uses obviously flawed logic to discredit the original argument, it means the person making the argument really never set out to make any real effort to counter that argument. Monty Python illustrated best in their “taunting Frenchmen” bit on The Holy Grail. Don’t concern yourself with logic, just hurl insults.
And, for Eugene’s enlightenment, the whole birther thing has been kept alive because The White House will not provide a legitimate birth certificate. Now, I carry one in my pocket. It’s not that hard a thing to do. If Obama was the least bit interested in putting this whole birther thing to rest, he would have presented it. As it is, he apparently doesn’t care one way or the other. That’s the boat I’m in. I could care less. But, what I don’t believe in at all is running around hurling insults at people who believe otherwise, either way. Sure, it sounds kinda crazy that some people are making the argument Obama wasn’t born in the United States. But, it sounds even crazier to me that some people think CNN is not politically biased. And, in the big scope of things, which is more realistically dangerous, people of no influence thinking their president was born outside of the United States, or, media people ignoring media bias?
New Jersey’s having all kinds of fun over the last week or so. Here’s some of their local headlines:
And from the New York Post:
CNN ran it as a headline:
No party affiliations mentioned.
Wolf Blitzer?
“Dozens of public figures, including mayors, are caught in a stunning corruption sweep. They belong to both major parties.”
Deborah Feyerick?
“nearly 30 politicians and public officials, Democrats and Republicans, were rounded up in what prosecutors called the largest sweep of its kind.”
ABC, CBS, and NBC all ran stories during their evening broadcasts, not one mention of party affiliation. So, sounds like a bipartisan affair doesn’t it? By my best guess, this bipartisan affair now includes 42 Democrats and 4 Republicans including people working for the Democrat governor. Among the usual charges of taking bribes and the like, a rabbi is charged along with one of them as well as one pandering human organs.
“An ethical cloud hangs over the Capitol, … This culture of corruption must stop. … The American people deserve better.” – Nancy Pelosi. Maybe it will stop when media starts reporting ethically.
Sometimes I feel like most of my views are totally contrarian. That beliefs in traditional values and harsh consequences for harsh actions is something most people can’t deal with. Then I see something like this on Facebook:
Results: Is the death penalty wrong?
Now, Facebook’s as hip as it gets. This ain’t a bunch of old folks chatting, it’s people of all ages, races, denominations, etc.. What I like about social networking sites is it’s not controlled. When Foxnews releases a poll, I know it’s tilted to the right. With CNN, it’s tilted to the left. With MSNBC, it’s whatever they want it to be. In other words, it’s filtered. With a volunteer poll like Facebook, it’s not. My only reservation about proclaiming something CNNesque like “2/3 of all Americans support the death penalty” is out of the millions on Facebook, only 24,000 have taken this poll.
But, even with those 24,000, it makes me feel a lot better knowing at 16,568 other people think an eye for an eye is appropriate.
1
Jun
Anyone notice anything about the price of gas lately? I have. So has AAA:
| Regular | Mid | Premium | Diesel | 85 | **E85 MPG/BTU adjusted price |
|
| Current Avg. | $2.512 | $2.668 | $2.762 | $2.378 | $2.085 | $2.744 |
| Yesterday Avg. | $2.502 | $2.656 | $2.751 | $2.369 | $2.077 | $2.733 |
| Week Ago Avg. | $2.424 | $2.575 | $2.666 | $2.324 | $1.986 | $2.613 |
| Month Ago Avg. | $2.061 | $2.189 | $2.267 | $2.254 | $1.766 | $2.324 |
| Year Ago Avg. | $3.975 | $4.221 | $4.372 | $4.791 | $3.316 | $4.364 |
It’s going up again. In fact, in 30 days, it’s gone up about 25%. That’s a pretty big jump if you ask me. Seems gas jumping 25% in 30 days would be news to some. It’s not to CNN. MSNBC does mention it, but is quick to point out that it was more expensive a year ago. Running for office, Obama talked about the price of gas and what he would do about it when elected. What has happened since he’s taken office is the retail price of gas has increased 42%. While the price of gas was “killing people” when he ran, it’s apparently not now that he’s elected. And, if you think it’s an issue now, the “press” will quickly remind you that you have no reason to complain now, it was more expensive sometime in the past and therefore all is good now.
And no one seems to care.
I just did a little piece about how media was going the way of National Enquirer. Now, I was somewhat limited in my disdain since I was relying on the internet for my news. Apparently, the sexual innuendo wasn’t limited to the internet. Anderson Cooper had this to say about yesterday’s demonstrations:
“It’s hard to talk when you’re teabagging,”
David Shuster wasn’t about to be outdone:
- “Teabagging day for the right wing and they are going nuts for it.”
- He described the parties as simultaneously “full-throated” and “toothless,”
- “They want to give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending.”
Now, I gotta admit, I had never heard of teabagging in the mode they were using it. Now I do thanks to a live news broadcast aired into the homes of children. I wonder how many kids across the land were asking their mommies why they didn’t go teabagging.
Class act David and Anderson. If there was ever a need for the FCC, now seems to be it. But, they won’t do anything. CNN and MSNBC won’t do anything. I guess the only real option is to block CNN and MSNBC so my child won’t be exposed to stuff I’d rather my six year old not be discussing at this time.
That’s nuts, guys. ( Heh,get it? Nuts? )
Is it a coincidence that both pieces I wrote today on media’s dissolving ethics involved MSNBC?
