'Bout time they dealt with those freeloaders on Sesame Street! Ditto for the commie treehuggers on Frontline!

Government has no business funding the lefty garbage on PBS to promote liberal causes like reading, writing, and education. And the money would be better spent on more manly righteous programs, like the President's Faith-Based Education Program.

And that Barney is just a shill for the evolutionist.

You have to tell us what you're talking about before you make comments.

Huh...? :confused:



Dude.

Put.

The Bong.

Down.... :dude:

And that Barney is just a shill for the evolutionist.

What nothing about Teletubbies????
Watching an infant watching Teletubbies is like watching a cat stalk a bird!
Chilling!
I think it's mind control...wait Trek is on gotta go!

You have to tell us what you're talking about before you make comments.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/22/AR2005062202294.html

http://hartfordadvocate.com/gbase/News/content?oid=oid:116570

Huh...? :confused:



Dude.

Put.

The Bong.

Down.... :dude:

Don't use the B-word on the net, nitwit!

Great, now we're both probably "flagged" by the NSA for supporting international terrorism.

I'm personally glad the White House is getting so involved in PBS, since they fixed the budget surplus, improved the economy, brought peace to the middle east, won the war in Iraq, and caught the man responsible for 9-11, they need to focus on fixing lefty-riddled PBS. Oh,and getting our social security dollars out of the hands of government and into the hands of bankers, credit card companys, and lawyers, where it belongs.

http://hartfordadvocate.com/gbase/N...?oid=oid:116570

Surely the thought behind this legislation is to get P.J. to switch over to some wholesome right-wing Republican propaganda on the Fox Network, you know, like Jerry Springer, Maury Povich or The O'Reilly Factor,

Jerry Springer :confused:

I'm personally glad the White House is getting so involved in PBS, since they fixed the budget surplus, improved the economy, brought peace to the middle east, won the war in Iraq, and caught the man responsible for 9-11, they need to focus on fixing lefty-riddled PBS. Oh,and getting our social security dollars out of the hands of government and into the hands of bankers, credit card companys, and lawyers, where it belongs.

Don't forget the "standard review and edit" of scientific documents so that those documents no longer contain conclusions founded in certifiable research but instead contain the ideas and positions of favorable lobbyists.

José

Don't use the B-word on the net, nitwit!

Great, now we're both probably "flagged" by the NSA for supporting international terrorism.

I'm personally glad the White House is getting so involved in PBS, since they fixed the budget surplus, improved the economy, brought peace to the middle east, won the war in Iraq, and caught the man responsible for 9-11, they need to focus on fixing lefty-riddled PBS. Oh,and getting our social security dollars out of the hands of government and into the hands of bankers, credit card companys, and lawyers, where it belongs.
just a hint of sarcasm there Phil?

And yet the President says:
"Yet for too long, governments have discriminated against faith-based programs -- just because they have a cross or a Star of David or a crescent on the wall. And that's why I signed an executive order that said that faith-based groups providing social services are entitled to the same access to federal money as other groups. I am proud that we have now opened billions of dollars in grant money to competition that includes our faith-based charities. For example, my administration awarded College Park Baptist Church in Orlando, Florida $5.8 million to build 68 homes for low-income seniors.

Because faith-based groups should never have to forfeit their religious liberty to get federal dollars -- and that's an important concept -- we want your help, we want your love, but at the same time, you do not have to forget the mission of faith or ignore the mission of faith that calls you to action in the first place. And that's why the executive order I signed should be codified into federal law. Congress needs to pass charitable choice legislation to forever guarantee equal treatment for our faith-based organizations when they compete for federal funds."
Source:http://www.theconservativevoice.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=6418


Near as I can tell we want Southern Baptist to believe what they want, and legally protect their right to do so. We want muppets to believe whatever they want too, as long as it's not thinking visiting a puppet lesbian couple is ok. And nobody should watch Frontline.

It gets very confusing...

I work for PBS, so needless to say, I'm watching this closely. Republican CPB chairman Kenneth Tomlinson has actually suggested that PBS ought to hire FOX's Britt Hume to advise PBS on how they might present more "fair & balanced" news programming. This is an attack on two fronts - to ultimately defund Public Broadcasting altogether - and failing that, to turn PBS and NPR into more of a "mouthpiece" for the Bush administration. I'm not going to try to argue with anyone as to whether this is a good or a bad thing - draw your own conclusions according to your politics and viewing and listening habits - but be aware that American taxpayers contribute roughly 1 of their tax dollars per year to the CPB.

Republican CPB chairman Kenneth Tomlinson has actually suggested that PBS ought to hire FOX's Britt Hume to advise PBS on how they might present more "fair & balanced" news programming. This is an attack on two fronts - to ultimately defund Public Broadcasting altogether - and failing that, to turn PBS and NPR into more of a "mouthpiece" for the Bush administration.

I can see it now,

"Sagawa says Jeb Bush is the Cat's Meow!"

"Barney Votes YES on the Estate Tax Exemption"

"Elmo says marriage is good!"*

*(As long as you are hetero)

^^ I diagree with everything you said. All of it!

^^ I diagree with everything you said. All of it!

Please elaborate, I'm genuinely curious. Do you think PBS was such a hotbed of liberal values that it should have been on the president's priority list, despite all the other problems this administration should be dealing with? Or do you think Sagawa is a McCain man?(err cat)

Personaly,my daughter Loves sesame street and its such a good show for kids...I'd hate to see anything happen to it.

Once again this is another sign that our Republican controlled government is drunk with power. This is Washington's way of showing us that they are in control. Could this all have been started after an episode of Postcards from Buster in which Buster and his dad visit the home of a lesbian couple?
UH OH! We don't want our children seeing that! We don't want our children to know that with the help of public tv, children can learn about how diverse our country is. But as you can see, Washington wants to control everything we see and hear. Welcome to George Bush's or should I say Dick Cheney's America!
Republican Jackasses! :mad:

It's always easy to bash the Republicans (not to mention a lot fun). But that wasn't the reason I started the thread.

I just found this story amazing for two reasons, first of all, I can't believe anybody is going after PBS. I got a three year and a one 1/2 year old sons. I love the two hours I get every morning when Sesame Street, Barney, and Teletubbies are on and they both actually sit still. I really value those two hours. And while I don't "get" the 'tubbies, Barney and Sesame St both do a amazing job of entertaining kids and teaching them things.

PBS has provided some amazing programming in my forty-odd years of TV viewing. And yes, I'll even give the Right the fact that PBS is definately left-leaning, I knew some Army Ranger & Delta guys, and SEAL's who got real upset when a Frontline segment aired a few years ago suggested that they had been suckered and ambushed in Somalia in the "Blackhawk Down" raid ( rather than just experiencing some extremely bad luck) and that the brilliant "ambush" was planned by Osama Bin Laden! But that's no excuse to tank PBS.

Second, and even more important, it really bothers me our president & high govt officials are wasting brain cells, money, and time on this trivial BS when the mess overseas is just getting worse and worse. Whether it's on purpose or not, it looks like misdirection.

Can you define exactly what makes PBS a hotbed of liberal thought, other than that they don't show programming affirming creationism/intelligent design and they will air limited, conservative gay/lesbian programming occasionally(all discussion/news magazines, I've never seen ANYTHING with a wiff of sex)?

Take a good look at Jim Leher, you can't get a more balanced news show, and on there things are actually debated and discussed. BBC World News? Pretty much just the facts ma'am, not even human interest puff pieces. I want you to take a good look at the guest lists on Bill Moyers' NOW. You'll find that he would have tons and tons of Republicans on, and not in ambush configurations or wimps. He wouldn't invite an Alan Colmes equiv and then invite Hannity and O'Reilly for the other side to beat the crap out of him for an hour.

The "liberal media" is mostly a myth developed by people who don't like fact getting in the way of their agendas. Look at the person hired to investigate Moyers (illegally and secretly), he works for a conservative thinktank. Wouldn't one want a non-partisan objective observer to establish the real situation? And someone from Fox News is certainly the exact opposite of what you want, just like someone from Air America would be. This Ken Tomlinson is simply a plant put into PBS to annihlate it from within, he has no qualifications for the job, he has no knowlege

Check out "What's the Matter with Kansas" by Thomas Harris., but don't take my word for it. Check it out yourself and do your own research.

I knew some Army Ranger & Delta guys, and SEAL's who got real upset when a Frontline segment aired a few years ago suggested that they had been suckered and ambushed in Somalia in the "Blackhawk Down" raid ( rather than just experiencing some extremely bad luck) and that the brilliant "ambush" was planned by Osama Bin Laden! But that's no excuse to tank PBS.

Why would the possibility of an ambush be upsetting? I'm asking not as a point of debate but more of trying to understand their anger. Even the best of us can't be on it every time, so there's always a possibility, no matter how remote.

Second, and even more important, it really bothers me our president & high govt officials are wasting brain cells, money, and time on this trivial BS when the mess overseas is just getting worse and worse. Whether it's on purpose or not, it looks like misdirection.

Amen bro.

José

Why would the possibility of an ambush be upsetting? I'm asking not as a point of debate but more of trying to understand their anger. Even the best of us can't be on it every time, so there's always a possibility, no matter how remote.

Well, to the Army Rangers & Delta, the battle of Modadishu is a real matter of pride. The story is well told in the book and movie "Black Hawk Down"(though the movie skipped the contributions of the SEALS), about 100 guys were basically stranded in a city that was trying to kill them. They took on all comers, held off a much superior attacking force, gathered and protected their wounded & dead, and the next morning 18 were dead and 73 were wounded.

It's how they got stranded that Frontline disputed. The official and well documented version is that they had some extremely bad luck. Murphy hit them in a big way. A guy fell from a helo two minutes into the operation. A helicopter was shot down by a lucky RPG shot. The convoy that was supposed to rescue them got lost and took tremendous casualties. A second helo went down. Since the entire original operation was to take 15 minutes in the afternoon, nobody worried about armor support, night vision, or water. Despite these obstacles and some bad decisions made high up the chain of command, the Rangers & Delta recovered and adapted admirably, estimates of the Somalia casualties ranged from 1,500 to 8,000 killed, depending on who you believe.

The Frontline suggested strongly that the Ranger version of events was wrong. It reported "recently discovered documents" "strongly suggested" that instead of being brutal thug who ruled with terror, Mohamed Aidid was a military genius being tutored by Osama Bin Laden. Osama taught Aidid how to modify RPG's to make them more effective. Aidid took this knowledge and used it against the Rangers. He purposely shot the chopper, then created roadblocks and ambushes to ambush the rescuers, because he and Osama were such students of US military tactics that they knew Rangers never leave their dead and wounded behind. They suckered the stupid military guys, who were just luckythey weren't beaten worse. And worse, to the spec war community, Frontline concluded that if the Ranger's had abandoned their dead, their losses would have been much less. Sadly, there is some truth to that, but a creed is a creed.

I got no beef with Frontline, or PBS. I've found Frontline to be an interesting, if a bit alarmist, show. But this particular episode was just dead wrong and total conjecture. But for a long time it colored peoples perceptions about exactly what happened in Somalia. Most people just remember the bodies being dragged thru the street. Fortunatly Mark Bowden researched & wrote "Blackhawk Down" and Ridley Scott bought the rights. Which was nice, the guys deserved the recognition, especially Delta snipers Gary Gordon and Randy Shughart, who won the Medal of Honor.

Still, I don't wanna scrap PBS because of one episode of Frontline. Or muppet lesbians.

For those of you who care about this, call your Congressman.

Check out "What's the Matter with Kansas" by Thomas Harris., but don't take my word for it. Check it out yourself and do your own research.

For once we are in complete agreement, I finished it last week and agree it is a brilliant book!

Can you define exactly what makes PBS a hotbed of liberal thought.

They say the White House got upset about about the Postcards from Buster lesbian couple episode, but I suspect the real beef with PBS were some of those POV specials about Bush's religious ties and campaign practices that aired after the election.

Thanks for the explanation, Philip!

José

Oh they've been screaming for years that PBS has liberal bias. At least a decade.

Postcards from Buster was simply a backlash 'one minute hate" of the day because it showed a lesbian couple, for about a minute in a situation that made them seem like regular people instead of perverted hedonists. It was a minor footnote in an episode taking place in a state where there are civil unions.

The Jesus Factor was pretty well straight up. There were Canadian and British documentaries that aired far, far. far more dirty laundry. The one they're really scared of every US network has refused to air, fearing the fury called "The Power of Nightmares". Just google it, I think somoene had it online at least for awhile.

Anyone who wants to see both the Mogadishu and "The Jesus Factor" (Bush and religion) can view them free of charge on the net

And fifty other fascinating segments:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ambush/view/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jesus/view/

Thanks for the explanation, Philip!

José

While I liked the movie "Blackhawk Down", it and the better (imho) History Channel documentary on the DVD, and my summary are extremely simplified versions of the story. If the story interest you, check out the book which is a helluva read.

Great links, Sword!

Darth Cheney and his apprentice Lord Bush on The Planet Haliburton

Britt Hume (heh) "fair and balanced" (BWaaaaHAAAAHAAAAA!!!!!)

An oxymoron in the same league as Central Intelligence......

Britt Hume (heh) "fair and balanced" (BWaaaaHAAAAHAAAAA!!!!!)

An oxymoron in the same league as Central Intelligence......
"Jumbo Shrimp"

True, there's very few PBS shows on how to cheat, lie, and pay off politicians to become rich. Maybe there should be. Then we can all join the party.

This is actually from yesterday afternoon but I've been very busy:

"Moments ago, the House of Representatives voted to restore $100 million in federal funding for public broadcasting. Eighty-six Republicans joined 196 Democrats and 1 Independent in supporting an amendment put forward by Representatives David Obey, Nita Lowey and Jim Leach to restore the FY 2006 CPB funding level to $400 million."
:thumbsup:

This is actually from yesterday afternoon but I've been very busy:

"Moments ago, the House of Representatives voted to restore $100 million in federal funding for public broadcasting. Eighty-six Republicans joined 196 Democrats and 1 Independent in supporting an amendment put forward by Representatives David Obey, Nita Lowey and Jim Leach to restore the FY 2006 CPB funding level to $400 million."
:thumbsup:

They musta heard the science fiction modeling community was against it. Either that or somebody finally realized being known as the guys who fired Elmo might not sound so hot in '08.

You know, it's interesting because PBS got its initial funding approval through a committe headed up by one of the hardest hardasses seen in Congress this century

I believe that one man made the difference and got it going, because he was able to melt the coldest ice

His name was Fred Rogers

Bravo to all who voted to make sure that his legacy remains intact

Originally Posted by Orne
Britt Hume (heh) "fair and balanced" (BWaaaaHAAAAHAAAAA!!!!!)

I laugh just as hard when I hear that "I'm about to enter a no spin zone!"

That leaves me feeling like I just rode that ride where you stand with your back to a carpeted wall in a round room. You know the one where they spin the room very fast then the floor drops away from your feet.

After it's done you are dizzy and a little sick.

This is actually from yesterday afternoon but I've been very busy:

"Moments ago, the House of Representatives voted to restore $100 million in federal funding for public broadcasting. Eighty-six Republicans joined 196 Democrats and 1 Independent in supporting an amendment put forward by Representatives David Obey, Nita Lowey and Jim Leach to restore the FY 2006 CPB funding level to $400 million."
:thumbsup:

AMEN!! I guess there are Republican politicians who know that time and money are better spent on trying to get the problem overseas done ASAP rather pluck Big Bird's feathers.

Why the very thought that the PBS should equally represent the diverse spectrum of opinion of the taxpayers that fund it is simply OUTRAGES! :rolleyes:

Why the very thought that the PBS should equally represent the diverse spectrum of opinion of the taxpayers that fund it is simply OUTRAGES! :rolleyes:



Oh, it absolutely should. Tomlinson seems to be in the minority in believing that Public Broadcasting is "slanted". Tomlinson paid $10,000 to a consultant to find liberal bias on Bill Moyer's NOW program - but for some reason declined to release the results of that "study". He also attempted to keep the results of two “National Public Opinion” surveys under wraps. These documents - buried in an annual report to Congress but neither released to the press nor shared with PBS and NPR, reveal that the overwhelming majority of the U.S. public is happy with PBS and NPR programming.

Conducted between June 29-July 2003 and surveying 1,008 adults, the National Public Opinion Survey #2 showed that public broadcasting had an 80 percent “Favorable” rating; only 10 percent of those polled had an “Unfavorable” opinion of PBS and public radio. PBS "News & Information 'consumers'” were highly supportive of such programs as the "Newshour," "Frontline," "Morning Edition," and "All Things Considered."



More than half of those surveyed believed that PBS news and information programming was more “trustworthy” than news shows on the commercial networks, including ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, and CNN (while between 6 and 15 percent found PBS programming less trustworthy). Similarly, more than half of those surveyed believed that PBS provided more "in-depth" news and information programming than the networks (compared to between 17 and 24 percent who thought such programming was less in-depth). Only about 8 percent thought that PBS’s Iraq war coverage was “slanted.” More than a quarter of those surveyed said the reporting was “fair and balanced” (while 63 percent had “no opinion” at all). NPR received similar results. Few respondents believed that PBS and NPR “coverage of the Bush Administration” was “slanted” (a result that no doubt disappointed those at CPB who had formulated the question).


Finally, more than half (55 percent) said that PBS programming was “fair and balanced," with strong support for its “high quality programming” and as “a valuable cultural resource.” NPR received an even higher approval rating for its programming, including perceptions that it is “fair and balanced” (79 percent of respondents). There was also strong support for government funding of public broadcasting (with only 10 percent of those surveyed believing that the annual $1.30 per capita funding was "too much").


The irony is the surveys were conducted with the intent of finding bias problems to correct. However, both the GOP and Democratic poll companies couldn't find ammunition for Tomlinson. This still hasn't stopped him from counter-programming at CPB - Tomlinson continues to push to bring more conservative programming to PBS, still insisting that the system has a liberal political bias. Last November, members of the Association of Public Television Stations met in Baltimore along with officials from the corporation and PBS. In a speech at that meeting, Mr. Tomlinson told them they should make sure their programming better reflected "the Republican mandate".

Al Franken says PBS will be happy to run pro-Bush documentaries, as soon as he does something not inherently evil.

I bet the White House must love the Sundance channel. I betcha Redford get's audited every year!

You realize Zorro that those who already think PBS and NPR are slanted will read your post as follows:

Oh,... absolutely blah blah blah Public Broadcasting is "slanted". Tomlinson's... consultant find... liberal bias on Bill Moyer's NOW program blah blah blah. These documents blah blah blah reveal that the overwhelming majority of the U.S. public blah blah blah had an “Unfavorable” opinion of PBS and public radio. Blah blah blah More than half of those surveyed believed that PBS news and information programming was blah blah blah less trustworthy. Similarly, more than half of those surveyed believed that blah blah blah PBS’s Iraq war coverage was “slanted.” More than a quarter of those surveyed said blah blah blah that PBS and NPR “coverage of the Bush Administration” was “slanted” blah blah blah.

José

You realize Zorro that those who already think PBS and NPR are slanted will read your post as follows:



José

:) Yes.:cry:

How hard is it to spell "outrageous?" Why is it that any time I see an online argument with a conservative, they can't spell? Maybe they should have watched more "Sesame Street" as kids... :tongue:

How hard is it to spell "outrageous?" Why is it that any time I see an online argument with a conservative, they can't spell? Maybe they should have watched more "Sesame Street" as kids... :tongue:

I don't spell so well either sometimes. And I completely agree that it is incumbent upon Public Broadcasting to present balanced programming as long as it is operating with so much as one tax dollar from the American public. What I do mind is uninformed debate and accusations. Despite his best efforts, Tomlinson has been unable to come up with any objective evidence of a liberal bias - but he just believes Public Broadcasting is biased anyway. I've heard a few people say over the years: "I don't watch PBS much, but I watch it enough to know they're biased." That's sort of like me saying: "I don't watch Nicole Kidman movies often, but I watch them enough to know that she secretly wants to sleep with me." Some people see what they want to see - evidence to the contrary be damned.

Sorry for the poor spelling. I am well aware that "non-judgmental, enlightened libs" never, ever make spelling mistakes on these forums. I was at work trying to put my evil, conservative spin on yet another television show I was working on and in somewhat of a hurry - as I am now - to go on vacation!



See ya'll in a week! :)

Sorry for the poor spelling. I am well aware that "non-judgmental, enlightened libs" never, ever make spelling mistakes on these forums. I was at work trying to put my evil, conservative spin on yet another television show I was working on and in somewhat of a hurry - as I am now - to go on vacation!



See ya'll in a week! :)


:) Good comeback!

I don't spell so well either sometimes.

Thanks for that Zorro. You must've posted moments before I posted the above.

Later!

Some people see what they want to see - evidence to the contrary be damned.

Oh my Lord there is a big enough group in this country to show proof of that.
Of course they may just claim to have been fed that irradiated cereal several decades ago.

Sorry for the poor spelling. I am well aware that "non-judgmental, enlightened libs" never, ever make spelling mistakes on these forums. I was at work trying to put my evil, conservative spin on yet another television show I was working on and in somewhat of a hurry - as I am now - to go on vacation!



See ya'll in a week! :)

Have a gud vacation!

Sorry for the poor spelling. I am well aware that "non-judgmental, enlightened libs" never, ever make spelling mistakes on these forums. I was at work trying to put my evil, conservative spin on yet another television show I was working on and in somewhat of a hurry - as I am now - to go on vacation!



See ya'll in a week! :)

I wouldn't worry, check this out!
"Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in
waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the
frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and
you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed
ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.

ceehiro"

Have a good break!:dude:

Sonuds lkie blulhsit to me!

Out-ray-juss. :thumbsup:

Damn...can no one recognize sarcasm?

Yes. I can't. :)