Right on Bill-O!

Let Big Daddy Soros foot the bill. They are doing his work anyway.

Would liberals want their tax dollars paying Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck’s salaries? Why the hell should we pay the salaries of dinosaur liberal broadcasters who can’t compete in the marketplace.

Yes because let’s kill Sesame Street and every other kids educational show on PBS. Is this a Beckian ploy to get people to buy Dildo’s kids book?

Jackie_Treehorn says:
Yes because let’s kill Sesame Street and every other kids educational show on PBS. Is this a Beckian ploy to get people to buy Dildo’s kids book?

Well that would only happen if they can’t compete in the marketplace.

Seeing November From My Window said:
Jackie_Treehorn says:Yes because let’s kill Sesame Street and every other kids educational show on PBS. Is this a Beckian ploy to get people to buy Dildo’s kids book? Well that would only happen if they can’t compete in the marketplace.

I have to say you really thought thi s one through, Michelle-in-Utah. Sesame Street sponsored by sugary breakfast cereals, candy bars, sodas and must have toys. Just what we need.

They don’t NEED our middle class tax dollars to support them:

http://www.wqub.org/media/NPR%20Profile%20stats%202009/NPR%20demographics.pdf

The people that listen to NPR are plenty capable of paying for it their damnselves.

Same with PBS.

timzank said:
They don’t NEED our middle class tax dollars to support them: http://www.wqub.org/media/NPR%20Profile%20stats%202009/NPR%20demographics.pdf The people that listen to NPR are plenty capable of paying for it their damnselves. Same with PBS.

We do, Twit. It’s called fundraising. The government only pays 1-2% through grants.

Next whine, please.

The Real Royal King said:
I have to say you really thought thi s one through, Michelle-in-Utah. Sesame Street sponsored by sugary breakfast cereals, candy bars, sodas and must have toys. Just what we need.

Have to agree with you on this one. They would have to admit Capitalism is a good thing. Better to just stand with your hand out waiting for money to rain from the sky, and when that doesn’t work just pilfer it from the taxpayers…

Don’t worry, people, I speak conservative. Translation:
“Ignore the Constitution when it’s not convenient and can be used against our opponents!”

The Real Royal King said:
We do, Twit. It’s called fundraising. The government only pays 1-2% through grants. Next whine, please.

$420 million a year is is not chump change. It’s an unnecessary expense.

timzank said:
$420 million a year is is not chump change. It’s an unnecessary expense.

It sure ceased being a matter of principle quickly, Tim Z. Angst.

disenlightened said:
Would liberals want their tax dollars paying Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck’s salaries? Why the hell should we pay the salaries of dinosaur liberal broadcasters who can’t compete in the marketplace.

None of those people claim to be journalists.
NPR receives very little public funding. Regardless of Bill’s questionable definition of far left, the reason I enjoy listening is they cover subjects in depth with a lot more factual information and intelligent analysis by people who normally have a serious background in the selected subject. I’ve never thought of it as very left leaning but rather more like actual analytical in depth news rather than superficial partisan opinion like we hear from the three you mentioned and other pundits like Olberman Maddow and O Donnell.

Dear Hillary: The house appropriates….your statement: “according to O’Reilly, the nation’s debt has grown $5 trillion since Nancy Pelosi became the Speaker of the House. (Of course, Republican George W. Bush was still president when Pelosi was sworn in, so this seems like an odd fact to cite; why not say how the debt has grown since President Obama’s Democratic administration began?)” really shows some massive ignorance. Shame on you.

Study up gal.

Defund NPR and Decrease Democrats!

OH and PS: Are you interviewing for a job with NPR or PBS? You fit their bill – trash republicans without even understanding the role of the house.

O’Reilly is absolutely correct and he will take this message through to it’s completion. Defund NPR and PBS, there is no longer a need for US Tax Payers to carry this left-leaning stations.

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
Don’t worry, people, I speak conservative. Translation:“Ignore the Constitution when it’s not convenient and can be used against our opponents!”

What on Earth are you talking about?

TfT said:
OH and PS: Are you interviewing for a job with NPR or PBS? You fit their bill – trash republicans without even understanding the role of the house. O’Reilly is absolutely correct and he will take this message through to it’s completion. Defund NPR and PBS, there is no longer a need for US Tax Payers to carry this left-leaning stations.

I have to admit, it would help to further dumb down Amerika. That would be good for you.

CosmosDan said:
None of those people claim to be journalists.NPR receives very little public funding. Regardless of Bill’s questionable definition of far left, the reason I enjoy listening is they cover subjects in depth with a lot more factual information and intelligent analysis by people who normally have a serious background in the selected subject. I’ve never thought of it as very left leaning but rather more like actual analytical in depth news rather than superficial partisan opinion like we hear from the three you mentioned and other pundits like Olberman Maddow and O Donnell.

I’m glad you enjoy, you can pay for it.

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Yes because let’s kill Sesame Street and every other kids educational show on PBS. Is this a Beckian ploy to get people to buy Dildo’s kids book?

Sesame Street will survive! – It’s Liberal Democrats that WON’T!

The Real Royal King said:
It sure ceased being a matter of principle quickly, Tim Z. Angst.

It’s wrong to publicly fund it for two reasons, one financial, the other on principle. Pretty simple.

CosmosDan said:
NPR receives very little public funding.

i love the liberals who simultaneously argue that NPR gets very little federal money, yet we shouldn’t cut it off. If its very little money and won’t hurt the organization, who cares? We have a trillion dollar deficit and a 13 trillion dollar federal debt. Isn’t this a great place to start cutting?

Jackie_Treehorn said:
Yes because let’s kill Sesame Street and every other kids educational show on PBS. Is this a Beckian ploy to get people to buy Dildo’s kids book?

None of those shows would be affected, PBS wouldn’t close up, they’d simply be paying their own expenses. A litle more fundraising and some help from soros and all is well.

timzank said:
It’s wrong to publicly fund it for two reasons, one financial, the other on principle. Pretty simple.

I have to admit that the Sesame Street sponsors include ARABIC numerals. Maybe, if Sesame Street started using Roman numerals only you would find funding more acceptable.

AnonymousFinch said:
i love the liberals who simultaneously argue that NPR gets very little federal money, yet we shouldn’t cut it off. If its very little money and won’t hurt the organization, who cares? We have a trillion dollar deficit and a 13 trillion dollar federal debt. Isn’t this a great place to start cutting?

Then, perhaps move to the School Lunch Program for indigent children?

The Real Royal King said:
I have to admit that the Sesame Street sponsors include ARABIC numerals. Maybe, if Sesame Street started using Roman numerals only you would find funding more acceptable.

Keith O – shouldn’t you be preparing for tomorrow’s episode of Meltdown?

AnonymousFinch said:
i love the liberals who simultaneously argue that NPR gets very little federal money, yet we shouldn’t cut it off. If its very little money and won’t hurt the organization, who cares? We have a trillion dollar deficit and a 13 trillion dollar federal debt. Isn’t this a great place to start cutting?

I didn’t argue that did I? I’ll thank you not to put words ion my mouth I never said.

I know the deficit is a serious problem. I don’t think there are other places that are much better places to start, such as bringing our troops home from the Middle East. I think there are plenty of other higher priorities for cutting the budget and increasing revenue. That said, I’d have no real objection to cutting public funding. I’d love to see consumers be a little more concerned about getting real journalism and having our media educate us as much as NPR does.

TfT said:
Dear Hillary: The house appropriates….your statement: “according to O’Reilly, the nation’s debt has grown $5 trillion since Nancy Pelosi became the Speaker of the House. (Of course, Republican George W. Bush was still president when Pelosi was sworn in, so this seems like an odd fact to cite; why not say how the debt has grown since President Obama’s Democratic administration began?)” really shows some massive ignorance. Shame on you.

Study up gal.

Hi, TfT—Nancy Pelosi became the Speaker of the House on January 4, 2007. Barack Obama assumed office on January 20, 2009. What about my comment, then, “shows some massive ignorance”?

timzank said:
I’m glad you enjoy, you can pay for it.

I do and will continue to do so. I’m interested in actually being informed by the programs I listen to which pretty much leaves out the three you mentioned and their liberal pundit counterparts

The Real Royal King said:
Then, perhaps move to the School Lunch Program for indigent children?

Why should my hard earned tax dollars pay for latte sipping norwesters radio programming? Do you think 6 figure a year doctorate holders need my tax dollars to hear their favorite radio programs?

Seriously? The federal fucking government should pick up the tab?????

Is there anything you fuckers don’t think should subsidized by the rest of us?

Tim, that wasn’t you that mentioned three pundits. My mistake , sorry.

CosmosDan said:
I didn’t argue that did I? I’ll thank you not to put words ion my mouth I never said.

I know the deficit is a serious problem. I don’t think there are other places that are much better places to start, such as bringing our troops home from the Middle East. I think there are plenty of other higher priorities for cutting the budget and increasing revenue. That said, I’d have no real objection to cutting public funding. I’d love to see consumers be a little more concerned about getting real journalism and having our media educate us as much as NPR does.

Wow did I phrase that incorrectly I meant I DO think there are other places

timzank said:
Why should my hard earned tax dollars pay for latte sipping norwesters radio programming? Do you think 6 figure a year doctorate holders need my tax dollars to hear their favorite radio programs? Seriously? The federal fucking government should pick up the tab????? Is there anything you fuckers don’t think should subsidized by the rest of us?

I find your foul and filthy language offensive.

The Real Royal King said:
I find your foul and filthy language offensive.

I find mostly all of your posts vapid and full of nothingness but middle school insults. I also find it pathetic you have to use a second name ‘Iris’.

The Real Royal King said:
I find your foul and filthy language offensive.

Good. Now man up and pay for your own news ya leech.

Does Bill ‘O Reilly’s ego know no bounds?

PBS, NPR, CBC, TVO etc etc…all sucking at the taxpayer’s teat…

The barbarians are at the gate! I realize the rightwingers who live on this website are really quite extreme, and it has been suggested, some might be paid consultants, but their glee in applauding O’Reilly’s idea of defunding the small amounts of money that PBS and NPR get is more symbolic of a sick society than anything else. Why is it that virtually every advanced country and some not so advanced has governmental involvement in both health care and the media. Think BBC and CBC and their equivalents everywhere. Defunding the BBC and abolishing the universal health care system would cause a revolution in Britain. It serves the public very well because it reflects the best of British culture. I lived in England for many years and it was great not getting sick worrying about the expense of getting sick, and the BBC programming was great – think Monte Peyton and brilliant drama, etc. Despite all the propaganda, universal health care is successful everywhere it’s practiced. In most countries, you do have a choice between private care or state care, or both. Completely private health care as we’re discovering doesn’t work very well.

We the people own the airwaves and maybe just a little bit should reflect the best values of our country. PBS & NPR do quality programming that can’t be duplicated elsewhere. Maybe some more of you rightwingers should tune in more often. We the people really own the airwaves and perhaps a little bit of it should serve the public. Commerical media is fine but it cannot fully serve the public as we well know – it’s basically there to sell product. I’m beginning to see that the teabag mentality is one of a brutalized, exploited people who are angry at the so-called elites and yet they are backed in every possible way by some of the very worse elements amongst these elites. It’s all very irrational! They would privatize everything including their souls.

Ever since Reagan said that government was the problem, the rightwing has deliberately made it the problem and we saw that clearly under Bush II. A small number of very wealthy ‘elitists’ and their paid allies in Congress have done everything they can to delegitimitize government, and they’ve succeeded. Forrtunately, there are limits in how far this dumbing down of America can go before a truly populist movement will arise to push back these fools. Eventually we will have a government that truly serves the best interests of all of us, and it certainly can’t be the very limited and chaotic visions offered by the Teabaggers.

Living overseas does not qualify you as being smarter than other people.

wow, the comments regarding this article puts the congress into perspective, no matter the place, when it come’s to politics folks find it hard to find common ground …

as for NPR, if they receive little grant money from the tax payer than let’s stop it, allow the free market to support it …

Look at the power they would have to say to the right, see we can succeed without the government.

Corvax said:
Living overseas does not qualify you as being smarter than other people.

And living in a trailer does not make you an expert on people.

Corvax said:
Living overseas does not qualify you as being smarter than other people.

the real john t said:
And living in a trailer does not make you an expert on people.

And being able to type does not make you smarter or an expert on people.

what if you live in a trailer oversees and can type?

O’Reilly’s just jealous that “Car Talk” and “Prairie Home Companion” get better ratings than he does.

OPRAH BITCH-SLAPS “THE VIEW”

Oprah (on her new network):
“It’ll be fun and entertaining, without tearing down people and calling them BITCHES!”

Wow! – Behar took that one right across the face!

So will she be coming back at ‘O’?
Not likely with that cowardly BITCH!

Hey BayWhore, to paraphrase:
“Come say that in Chicago, Bitch!”
heh-heh-heh!

CosmosDan said:
None of those people claim to be journalists.
NPR receives very little public funding. Regardless of Bill’s questionable definition of far left, the reason I enjoy listening is they cover subjects in depth with a lot more factual information and intelligent analysis by people who normally have a serious background in the selected subject. I’ve never thought of it as very left leaning but rather more like actual analytical in depth news rather than superficial partisan opinion like we hear from the three you mentioned and other pundits like Olberman Maddow and O Donnell.

Nina Totenberg and her gang aren’t journalists either, they’re activists pushing a point of view. What little straight news NPR providse can easily be found at other sources that are not taxpayer funded. I’m happy you enjoy listening to NPR, but unless you’re willing to fund my eBay music purchases and subscription to Rush’s web site, I don’t want to pay for your listening enjoyment either. Saying NPR receives very little public funding is inaccurate. Like PBS, they receive a ton of tax dollars through the back door. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting received $420 million last year and Obama has requested $460 billion next year to get their message out.

Michele said:
wow, the comments regarding this article puts the congress into perspective, no matter the place, when it come’s to politics folks find it hard to find common ground … as for NPR, if they receive little grant money from the tax payer than let’s stop it, allow the free market to support it … Look at the power they would have to say to the right, see we can succeed without the government.

I was thinking the same thing about those billions of dollars we give out to farmers for not growing crops, or those unconscienably low taxes that big corporations and their hundred million dollar CEOs pay.

What about Radio Marti? We spend 50 million a year on that. Shouldn’t a radio station intended to oppose Cuban communism be standing on its own, without government handouts?

valkyrie101 said:
What about Radio Marti? We spend 50 million a year on that. Shouldn’t a radio station intended to oppose Cuban communism be standing on its own, without government handouts?

That’s a very good point.

Vidiot said:
O’Reilly’s just jealous that “Car Talk” and “Prairie Home Companion” get better ratings than he does.

I love both of those programs. Bill-o, not so much.

valkyrie101 said:
I was thinking the same thing about those billions of dollars we give out to farmers for not growing crops, or those unconscienably low taxes that big corporations and their hundred million dollar CEOs pay.

You realize we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world, right?

valkyrie101 said:
What about Radio Marti? We spend 50 million a year on that. Shouldn’t a radio station intended to oppose Cuban communism be standing on its own, without government handouts?

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_y_Televisi%C3%B3n_Mart%C3%AD

“Radio Marti operates with about 100 employees and a budget of $15 million. Its mission, in its own words, is to provide “a contrast to Cuban media and provide its listeners with an uncensored view of current events.” Former prisoners in Cuba and Cuban exiles often speak on Radio Marti; and on Saturdays a Spanish version of the U.S. president’s weekly radio address, as well as the opposition’s response, are transmitted.”

Aside from having the budget off by $35 mil, you also might want to take into consideration the audience is truly unable to hear anything else because of the oppressive communist government blackout on all info “not” Fidel.

Apples and oranges Valk, but I personally wouldn’t have a problem pulling the plug on it as well.

Pablo said:
You realize we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world, right?

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner disputed criticisms that the U.S. corporate rate is too high, contending that the effective tax rate—after deductions—is “about average.”

valkyrie101 said:
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner disputed criticisms that the U.S. corporate rate is too high, contending that the effective tax rate—after deductions—is “about average.”

You trust a guy that can’t even use “turbo tax”?

Vidiot said:
O’Reilly’s just jealous that “Car Talk” and “Prairie Home Companion” get better ratings than he does.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Prairie_Home_Companion

“The show is distributed by Minnesota Public Radio’s distribution arm, American Public Media, to more than 500 public radio stations in the United States as well as other outlets. Approximately 3.9 million U.S. listeners tune in each week”

Bill O get’s about 4 to 6 million a NIGHT.

valkyrie101 said:
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner disputed criticisms that the U.S. corporate rate is too high, contending that the effective tax rate—after deductions—is “about average.”

This HAS to be a joke.

disenlightened said:
This HAS to be a joke.

Democrat math again.

I bring the data, Valk brings: “Well, Geithner said…” Heckuva job, Valky.

timzank said:
Aside from having the budget off by $35 mil, you also might want to take into consideration the audience is truly unable to hear anything else because of the oppressive communist government blackout on all info “not” Fidel.

Its Radio and “TV” Marti, and I was off a little, the budget is 34 million.

The Real Royal King said:
Then, perhaps move to the School Lunch Program for indigent children?

LOL…ever the Libs’ favorite flag to wave: The School Lunch Program. “The Chil’en will STARVE!”

Pablo said:
I bring the data, Valk brings: “Well, Geithner said…” Heckuva job, Valky.

He didn’t cite where Geithner actually said it either but it doesn’t really matter. This administration (and democrats in general) always throw out inaccurate statements knowing full well the base will eat it up, the AP will run it in a gazillion papers and when proven ridiculous the correction will get mentioned on page 36 in a quarter inch column.

Typical..

ChrisNH said:
LOL…ever the Libs’ favorite flag to wave: The School Lunch Program. “The Chil’en will STARVE!”

And I thought child obesity was a problem…make up your mind libbies…are they starving or overfed? Depends on which days talking points have been distributed I guess.

Pablo said:
I bring the data, Valk brings: “Well, Geithner said…” Heckuva job, Valky.

The “data” suggests that the gap between rich and poor in the U.S. is at the highest level since JP Morgan and Corporate profits are at the highest level they have ever been. And no, you do not pay corporate taxes on gross profit, so all those multi-million dollar corporate salaries, and the hundreds of billions of dollars of investment in China and other places where the corporations have exported US jobs, do not face significant corporate taxation. Not to mention the fact that thousands of corporations maintain their corporate presence in foreign countries in order to avoid U.S. taxation.

As THE WALL STREET JOURNAL reported, a recent study found that the top .01% or 14,000 American families hold 22.2% of wealth — the bottom 90%, or over 133 million families, just 4% of the nation’s wealth.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/06132008/profile2.html

“The Real Royal King said:
Then, perhaps move to the School Lunch Program for indigent children?”

I particularly enjoy this blatant lie. I live in a pretty conservative area and our school system provides breakfast and lunch all year long, not just during the school year. Ain’t nobody going hungry in the school systems.

valkyrie101 said:
The “data” suggests that the gap between rich and poor in the U.S. is at the highest level since JP Morgan and Corporate profits are at the highest level they have ever been. And no, you do not pay corporate taxes on gross profit, so all those multi-million dollar corporate salaries, and the hundreds of billions of dollars of investment in China and other places where the corporations have exported US jobs, do not face significant corporate taxation. Not to mention the fact that thousands of corporations maintain their corporate presence in foreign countries in order to avoid U.S. taxation. As THE WALL STREET JOURNAL reported, a recent study found that the top .01% or 14,000 American families hold 22.2% of wealth — the bottom 90%, or over 133 million families, just 4% of the nation’s wealth. http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/06132008/profile2.html

You realize “poor” in this country is comprised of families with 2 tv’s, cable & internet, free food at school, free food stamps, vouchers for rent, 2 cars, etc etc etc…

timzank said:
You realize “poor” in this country is comprised of families with 2 tv’s, cable & internet, free food at school, free food stamps, vouchers for rent, 2 cars, etc etc etc…

Appalling. A great country needs its urchins.

disenlightened said:
Nina Totenberg and her gang aren’t journalists either, they’re activists pushing a point of view. What little straight news NPR providse can easily be found at other sources that are not taxpayer funded. I’m happy you enjoy listening to NPR, but unless you’re willing to fund my eBay music purchases and subscription to Rush’s web site, I don’t want to pay for your listening enjoyment either. Saying NPR receives very little public funding is inaccurate. Like PBS, they receive a ton of tax dollars through the back door. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting received $420 million last year and Obama has requested $460 billion next year to get their message out.

Do you have a cite for that last bit of information?
I’m okay with NPR being privately funded with no taxpayer money. It’s disappointing to me to see our so called news media sink into partisan opinion shows with so little informative and educational content. It’s an incredible waste of a great resource. It’s also disappointing to discover so much of the public doesn’t seem to really care about making the extra effort to learn be truly informed and are happy to accept whatever the blogs spit out as factual.
Part of the danger we face now and in the years to come is financial interests controlling the flow of real information to the public. It seems to me that more and more it’s about emotion with few facts, and the public is accepting that rather than working against it. NPR may be left leaning but they offer more real informed content than any of the cable TV news channels. Left or right, we ought to give a shit about staying informed.

valkyrie101 said:
The “data” suggests that the gap between rich and poor in the U.S. is at the highest level since JP Morgan and Corporate profits are at the highest level they have ever been.

And the data suggests that french fries are high in carbs and that cassette tapes are all but obsolete. But then, we were talking about the corporate tax rate, weren’t we?

The Real Royal King said:
Appalling. A great country needs its urchins.

Since the beginning of time there have been poor people and rich people. History shows countries that have tried to correct that by government redistribution have always failed.

timzank said:
He didn’t cite where Geithner actually said it either but it doesn’t really matter. This administration (and democrats in general) always throw out inaccurate statements knowing full well the base will eat it up, the AP will run it in a gazillion papers and when proven ridiculous the correction will get mentioned on page 36 in a quarter inch column. Typical..

Wondering how long, if you were interested, it would take you to find Geithner’s quote? 5 seconds?

timzank said:
And I thought child obesity was a problem…make up your mind libbies…are they starving or overfed? Depends on which days talking points have been distributed I guess.

A Portrait in American Poverty

By the time they reach the age of 3, more than one-third of low-income urban children are already overweight or obese, according to a study released yesterday that provides alarming evidence that the nation’s battle of the bulge begins when toddlers are barely out of diapers.

Researchers armed with scales and measuring devices visited nearly 2,000 families in 20 US cities, including Boston, and evaluated the weight and height of 3-year-olds in an unprecedented effort to focus on obesity among the nation’s most vulnerable children.

Their finding: 35 percent of the low-income 3-year-olds were overweight or obese, a result more than twice the national rate for obesity among preschool children of all income levels and racial groups. Low-income Hispanic children, the researchers reported in the on line version of the American Journal of Public Health , were the most likely of all to have a weight problem, with 44 percent of those toddlers overweight or obese.

“valkyrie101 said:
The “data” suggests that the gap between rich and poor in the U.S. is at the highest level since JP Morgan and Corporate profits are at the highest level they have ever been”

Inane comments like this are meant to somehow imply that the “poor” in this country are getting “poorer” which is patently false.

timzank said:
Since the beginning of time there have been poor people and rich people. History shows countries that have tried to correct that by government redistribution have always failed.

Wasn’t there someone who famously said “The poor you will always have with you…”?

valkyrie101 said:
Wondering how long, if you were interested, it would take you to find Geithner’s quote? 5 seconds?

As I pointed out, it doesn’t really matter. I wouldn’t trust his opinion on anything having to do with math if he can’t even use turbo-tax which is no more difficult than paint by numbers. Unless of course you wanna cop to him being a bona fide tax cheat and he did it on purpose. Which is it? Is he a liar and a thief or just a fricking idiot that can’t follow simple directions? And he’s YOUR treasury secretary, heh.

This is like shooting ducks in a pond, you guys getting tired of being shot down yet?

timzank said:
Since the beginning of time there have been poor people and rich people. History shows countries that have tried to correct that by government redistribution have always failed.

However, American democracy, the most equitable system of government in history, is just over 200 years old. In our system, when the gap between rich and poor reaches the point that the majority of the people are suffering in poverty, we will vote in a new economic system.

timzank said:
As I pointed out, it doesn’t really matter. I wouldn’t trust his opinion on anything having to do with math if he can’t even use turbo-tax which is no more difficult than paint by numbers. Unless of course you wanna cop to him being a bona fide tax cheat and he did it on purpose. Which is it? Is he a liar and a thief or just a fricking idiot that can’t follow simple directions? And he’s YOUR treasury secretary, heh.

Well, sure. I knew that. Next time I will cite Sarah Palin, a far more credible source for you, no doubt.

valkyrie101 said:
Well, sure. I knew that. Next time I will cite Sarah Palin, a far more credible source for you, no doubt.

She’s not the treasury secretary, she has no control over your life. Lil’ Timmy Geithner has the checkbook and he’s either a thief or an incompetent boob. Either way he’s all yours as this economy tanks.

valkyrie101 said:
However, American democracy, the most equitable system of government in history, is just over 200 years old. In our system, when the gap between rich and poor reaches the point that the majority of the people are suffering in poverty, we will vote in a new economic system.

So we’ll be the first society in the history of the world to eliminate poverty huh?

Valk, I suspect people like you will never be convinced NOT to turn your lives over to the state. Seems to far ingrained in your belief system that the government is supposed to take care of us, not us take care of the government.

timzank said:
Valk, I suspect people like you will never be convinced NOT to turn your lives over to the state. Seems to far ingrained in your belief system that the government is supposed to take care of us, not us take care of the government.

Our’s is a government of, and for, the people.

timzank said:
So we’ll be the first society in the history of the world to eliminate poverty huh?

Why not, were Americans.

valkyrie101 said:
Why not, were Americans.

Yeah, no sense in relying on thousands of years of history and facts. Gotta give ya credit for being a dreamer.

timzank said:
Bill O get’s about 4 to 6 million a NIGHT.

To paraphrase Wikipedia, [citation needed]. What’s the source of that?

Car Talk gets about 4.4 million listeners per episode. Keillor gets somewhere between 3.9 and 4 million.

According to Business Insider: “O’Reilly has been averaging 3.16 million viewers in Fox News Channel’s 8 p.m. slot so far this year, according to Nielsen Media Resarch.”

And in the demo, he pulls about 900,000 per night.

timzank said:
Yeah, no sense in relying on thousands of years of history and facts. Gotta give ya credit for being a dreamer.

America was, is, was, and always will be, a dream.

There never has been a nation like ours and our potential remains substantially untapped.

valkyrie101 said:
Why not, were Americans.

And by the way, several countries have already substantially conquored poverty, or at least poverty of a sort that a person could just pass away for want of food or care. America lags behind other countries in tending to its common citizens. But we have a motherlode of billionaires.

How do you end poverty? Who has the money? Through a quirk in our economic system most of the money is in the hands of a tiny percentage of the population. Only they can end poverty. As it is now, they are holding their money or investing it overseas, all to the detriment of the U.S. worker.

And back to the thread…, Bill is much better than any paid advertiser for NPR which has gotten more hits in the past couple weeks than ever. Nobody is going to defund big bird, or numerous other shows that actually prefer not having to sell their soul to corporate interests, like FOX does. Bill can not afford to be objective and fair because his corporate masters would object.

They should be self-funded.

According to O’Reilly, the nation’s debt has grown $5 trillion since Nancy Pelosi became the Speaker of the House. (Of course, Republican George W. Bush was still president when Pelosi was sworn in, so this seems like an odd fact to cite; why not say how the debt has grown since President Obama’s Democratic administration began?)”

Actually, the $5 trillion is ACCORDING to the CBO.

Why cite debt since Pelosi became Speaker in 2007? Maybe because that’s when the Dems took control of Congress and they controlled all the spending.

CosmosDan said:
Do you have a cite for that last bit of information?

You can look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPR – scroll down to Funding, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_for_Public_Broadcasting, which will give budget information on NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). NPR receives tax dollars directly from the CPB, who received $422 million in 2010 from the feds. NPR also receives, through the back door, 40% of their budgets from member stations, who receive 16% of their budgets from local and federal governments. That 1-3% figure some are saying NPR receives from tax payers is actually only what they get directly from the CPB and does not include what they receive indirectly from taxpayers from member stations. By the way, I had a typo in that last post and meant $460 million, not billion.

disenlightened said:
You can look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPR – scroll down to Funding, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation_for_Public_Broadcasting, which will give budget information on NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). NPR receives tax dollars directly from the CPB, who received $422 million in 2010 from the feds. NPR also receives, through the back door, 40% of their budgets from member stations, who receive 16% of their budgets from local and federal governments. That 1-3% figure some are saying NPR receives from tax payers is actually only what they get directly from the CPB and does not include what they receive indirectly from taxpayers from member stations. By the way, I had a typo in that last post and meant $460 million, not billion.

You also have to figure in the cost to the taxpayers of donations to NPR being tax deductible.

Pablo said:
You also have to figure in the cost to the taxpayers of donations to NPR being tax deductible.

Are serious?

woops “Are you serious?”

Because if you calculate the cost to the tax payers, that way, then NPR is way down on the list of government funded institutions. The Catholic Church alone cost the public coffers billions.

welcome to :
===== http://www.goshops.org/ ======
This is a shopping paradise