Romney wants to get rid of PBS......

[Bonhomme Richard]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Right, could never happen, because the politicians in this country are looking out for the citizens and could care less about power and money

Hitler and Stalin would have LOVED to have had a government funded television network at their disposal, Teach.

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by acepepe

Simple question for the libs, Since we the American taxpayer pay for Bigbird & co. Shouldn't we the American taxpayer be getting the $45,000,000.00 from product licensing instead of the Henson corp. ????? HUH????

Why dont Republicans get this upset about charter schools? Same idea, more money being made.

Tax payers fund charter schools by allowing them to be housed in public schools. Charter schools are usually sponsored by the Walmarts and McDonalds of the world. Poisoning children's brains from the start to buy their products.

But I get it, Romney goes after PBS, the same budget that is spent every 4 hours to run the Pentagon!

11 years in Afghanistan, the Republicans war, all that money that could have been spent here, but now its PBS' fault.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

11 years in Afghanistan, the Republicans war, all that money that could have been spent here, but now its PBS' fault.

Democrats in congress voted overwhelmingly for the war. Nobody is blaming the massive deficit on PBS. It was a single example given in context to the moderator of the debate. But have fun wearing your Big Bird suit at the next OWS rapefest/rally.

[JetPotato]

Originally Posted by shakin318

Democrats in congress voted overwhelmingly for the war. Nobody is blaming the massive deficit on PBS. It was a single example given in context to the moderator of the debate. But have fun wearing your Big Bird suit at the next OWS rapefest/rally.

Even the OWS people would find this guy too mentally ill to hang with

[PatriotReign]

Originally Posted by Warfish

I have ~1,000 channels.

Why do I need to also pay for "Public" Broadcasting when there is no shartage of free-to-viewers, for-profit, broadcasting?

PBS (and NPR) may have had a place in the 50's. They do not in the 2000's.

I'd be interesting to hear what the specific arguments are for keeping taxpayer funded PBS/NPR today.

Also, many States have a State Version of PBS (like MPT, Maryland Publci Television) that at least addresses and covers local material you may not get via National TV/Radio options. If a State wants that, I support them doing so. I quite like MPT (of course I live in VA, lol).

This.

[sackdance]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

Even the OWS people would find this guy too mentally ill to hang with

Mic check mic check ...

People's Proposal #415: Call to banish Copernicus to the drum circle behind the porto-pottys, effective immediately. Let's vote....

aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye NO! aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by sackdance

Mic check mic check ...

People's Proposal #415: Call to banish Copernicus to the drum circle behind the porto-pottys, effective immediately. Let's vote....

aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye NO! aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye aye

LOL.................

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz

.012% of the Federal Budget

And?

Thats 0.012% less spent, and less that has to be cut from other, far more vital/humanitarian, programs.

Every dollar counts. Every hundred million counts too. Even if it's only 0.00whatever% of the whole.

Taking the "Meh, it's only 2 Billion" attitude is how deficits and debt never get fixed.

To me, this an example of how the left is not actually willing to compromise. When even a duplicative service such as PBS is a sacred cow that cannot be touched.....even though it's best programming would be snapped up in a heartbeat by the private sector.....how can we believe that any meaningfulo cutting of Federal Spending will EVER be permitted, outside the millitary of course (of of the fea actual constitutionally mandated expenditures).

If it's 0.012%, then thats 0.012%. Would you prefer we cut welfare programs instead?

Or is it really that you want only the millitary spending cut, and all else needs to come from more taxes (i.e. higher rates) and more taxes (cutting deductions for specific hated industriues) and more taxes (social engineering via penalizing behavior)?

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by Warfish

And?

Thats 0.012% less spent, and less that has to be cut from other, far more vital/humanitarian, programs.

Every dollar counts. Every hundred million counts too. Even if it's only 0.00whatever% of the whole.

Taking the "Meh, it's only 2 Billion" attitude is how deficits and debt never get fixed.

To me, this an example of how the left is not actually willing to compromise. When even a duplicative service such as PBS is a sacred cow that cannot be touched.....even though it's best programming would be snapped up in a heartbeat by the private sector.....how can we believe that any meaningfulo cutting of Federal Spending will EVER be permitted, outside the millitary of course (of of the fea actual constitutionally mandated expenditures).

If it's 0.012%, then thats 0.012%. Would you prefer we cut welfare programs instead?

Or is it really that you want only the millitary spending cut, and all else needs to come from more taxes (i.e. higher rates) and more taxes (cutting deductions for specific hated industriues) and more taxes (social engineering via penalizing behavior)?

Just seems like Romney starts with what common citizens like in PBS and ignores where he can cut at the top.

PBS has programing that is beneficial to common citizens. Whether it is art, science or politics, most people enjoy it and find it worthwhile.

If every dollar counts, shouldn't Romney have started with his own personal perks in the White House?

How about starting with cutting the 24 hr a day personal chefs (plural) in the White House? Staff includes the executive chefs in charge of three kitchens. THREE!!!!

The White House executive pastry chef?

The White House calligrapher?

The White House floral designer?

The White House barber?

Tailor?

The Blair House? Where White House guests stay. It is actually larger than the White House. Its has 119 rooms include more than 20 bedrooms for guests and staff, 35 bathrooms, four dining rooms, a gym, a flower shop and a hair salon. Seems a bit over the top. Can we cut here? Can this be sold and something smaller used?

Camp David? The presidents second home away from the White House that is also fully staffed. Will Romney cut here also?

Cut travel expenses? The president also gets a cool $100,000 for travel expenses in addition to AIR FORCE ONE that is staffed with 26 people, even a gym.

So much in the news about civil servant pensions. Didnt here Romney talk about cutting his own pension if he becomes president. Ex-presidents receive a hefty annual pension. They received $191,300 per year! In addition to that sum, they get a paid staff and office space, in addition to phone services and funds for office supplies.

Did Romney talk about a plan to get out of the ELEVEN YEAR WAR that Republicans started in Afghanistan? Think that might make up for the PBS budget?

How about the the billionaire give up the pennies he would make in salary as president compared to the billions he's already made in corporate America? He's asking all civil servants to give back, why not him?

Instead he goes after PBS? Really? This is where he will start?

Every American cannot afford 1000 channels like you have written about in this thread. Its what many American parents in poverty rely on to help their pre school children to learn and elevate themselves before they go to formal schooling.

But you see, those Americans do not count in Romney's America, middle class Americans dont count in Romeny's America, just the people that live like he will whether he becomes president or not.

[Sharrow]

aforementioned "r is for riot" video:

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Every American cannot afford 1000 channels like you have written about in this thread. Its what many American parents in poverty rely on to help their pre school children to learn and elevate themselves before they go to formal schooling.

Formal schooling start early. Why do we need PBS, when we have professional educators such as yourelf?

Are you saying you're not up to the task of teaching Kindergardners if they don't get their year or two of Big Bird first? And that poor families have no other alternatives of any kind to perform that educational task, including via their own interactions with their own kids?

Like I said, despite the claims, there is absolutely no room for compromise or negotiation regarding cutting spending with a liberal. Every penny of spending is sacrosanct, and to be defended to the death (debate-wise).

So be it, lets all vote, and winner gets the decide, as it should be, what we spend or not.

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by Warfish

Formal schooling start early. Why do we need PBS, when we have professional educators such as yourelf?

Are you saying you're not up to the task of teaching Kindergardners if they don't get their year or two of Big Bird first? And that poor families have no other alternatives of any kind to perform that educational task, including via their own interactions with their own kids?

Like I said, despite the claims, there is absolutely no room for compromise or negotiation regarding cutting spending with a liberal. Every penny of spending is sacrosanct, and to be defended to the death (debate-wise).

So be it, lets all vote, and winner gets the decide, as it should be, what we spend or not.

You truly are uninformed. Kindergarten kids are expected to know the alphabet and READ by the end of the school year. Think there is a difference between the kid who went to Pre K and not? BIG TIME! You probably think that kindergarten is nap time. Not surprised, you are not in education. Throwing a dart in the air with children's education, just the way it is now that that the Republicans have destroyed any respect that there once was for educators.

Really? This is the best you got, a personal "with educators like yourself why do we need........"

NYC currently has no pre-k for students. No public education for the years 1-5 for families who cannot afford it. Think those aren't vital for learning. Take away PBS, one less tool for lower income people to use for their children to learn from. Those children will eventually become adults and have less of a chance to become employeed and more of a chance to be on welfare.

[JetPotato]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Really? This is the best you got, a personal "with educators like yourself why do we need........"

NYC currently has no pre-k for students. No public education for the years 1-5 for families who cannot afford it. Think those aren't vital for learning. Take away PBS, one less tool for lower income people to use for their children to learn from. Those children will eventually become adults and have less of a chance to become employeed and more of a chance to be on welfare.

Link? To data that shows how the world collapses if we have no PBS?

Just

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by JetPotato

Link? To data that shows how the world collapses if we have no PBS?

Just

ROFLMAO!! Link? To data that shows how the world collapses if we have no PBS? You are hysterical! Yeah the world wont collapse initially, just like the student in the classroom, you wont see the damaging affects until years later.

Sorry no link to the ridiculous idea of seeing into the future of what the world might look like if there were no PBS, but here is a quote from Lavar Burton. An actor who has dedicated his life to children's programing through PBS and others.

http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stor...rmat=json&sb=1

"I am personally outraged that any serious contender for the White House would target as part of his campaign the children of America in this fashion. Educators across the country, as well as millions of children and adults know that the programming on PBS has been responsible for significant improvements in education, literacy, math, science and life skills for generations of our children." "On behalf of America's children, I can't stay silent," Burton continued. "I encourage you to join me in fighting this short-sighted and frankly mean-spirited attack on our children."

Hope Mitt Romney and all the Republicans sleep easy knowing Mitt has THREE full kitchens filled with staff in case he wants a midnight snack while unprivileged kids start school further behind.

Romney just mentioning cutting PBS before he would cut any ridiculous perks that he would have in the White House on the backs of children shows how disconnected he and the Republican party are.

[FF2®]

Originally Posted by Warfish

And?

Thats 0.012% less spent, and less that has to be cut from other, far more vital/humanitarian, programs.

Every dollar counts. Every hundred million counts too. Even if it's only 0.00whatever% of the whole.

Taking the "Meh, it's only 2 Billion" attitude is how deficits and debt never get fixed.

To me, this an example of how the left is not actually willing to compromise. When even a duplicative service such as PBS is a sacred cow that cannot be touched.....even though it's best programming would be snapped up in a heartbeat by the private sector.....how can we believe that any meaningfulo cutting of Federal Spending will EVER be permitted, outside the millitary of course (of of the fea actual constitutionally mandated expenditures).

If it's 0.012%, then thats 0.012%. Would you prefer we cut welfare programs instead?

Or is it really that you want only the millitary spending cut, and all else needs to come from more taxes (i.e. higher rates) and more taxes (cutting deductions for specific hated industriues) and more taxes (social engineering via penalizing behavior)?

beacuse it's just silly politics to mention PBS. It's meaningless. utterly meaningless. It's waste of time, not meant to save money but its just Romney pandering.

Make 2 less bombs that will never see the light of day anyway.

I'll take Nature and Frontline.

[shakin318]

There's another word for government-funded programming: Propaganda.


Hey Coperinicus, Practice Random Coherence.

[OCCH]

Originally Posted by copernicus

ROFLMAO!! Link? To data that shows how the world collapses if we have no PBS? You are hysterical! Yeah the world wont collapse initially, just like the student in the classroom, you wont see the damaging affects until years later.

Sorry no link to the ridiculous idea of seeing into the future of what the world might look like if there were no PBS, but here is a quote from Lavar Burton. An actor who has dedicated his life to children's programing through PBS and others.

http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stor...rmat=json&sb=1

"I am personally outraged that any serious contender for the White House would target as part of his campaign the children of America in this fashion. Educators across the country, as well as millions of children and adults know that the programming on PBS has been responsible for significant improvements in education, literacy, math, science and life skills for generations of our children." "On behalf of America's children, I can't stay silent," Burton continued. "I encourage you to join me in fighting this short-sighted and frankly mean-spirited attack on our children."

Hope Mitt Romney and all the Republicans sleep easy knowing Mitt has THREE full kitchens filled with staff in case he wants a midnight snack while unprivileged kids start school further behind.

Romney just mentioning cutting PBS before he would cut any ridiculous perks that he would have in the White House on the backs of children shows how disconnected he and the Republican party are.

Can you really say with a straight face that these "needy" kids aren't walking around with designer sneakers and newest generation ipods? That they don't have computers at home that could stream SS episodes 24/7 if they wanted?

I taught 8th grade for six years in Union City (an Abbott district right outside NYC) and loved every minute of it. But it was crystal clear that the parents who wanted to take advantage of all the programs offered to their kids did, and the ones who didn't were useless. Maybe NYC is different, but PBS is DEFINITELY not a deal breaker . . .

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by shakin318

There's another word for government-funded programming: Propaganda.


Hey Coperinicus, Practice Random Coherence.

Typical, no response to MANY ways that the elitist Mitt Romney could have mentioned to cut instead of PBS. Just ignore that the most unbiased programing with little to no corporate sponsorship is what Mitt Romney wants to cut before any ridiculous perk he would enjoy in the White House.

BTW, your "Practice Random Coherence" comment on my sig rather than the discussion speaks volume.

No meaning educational programing for all citizens while Mitt and his family consult with the White House floral designer on what flowers they'd like to see on the centerpiece at the gourmet breakfast table.

Remember 'poor people' every dollar counts...........

[FF2®]

Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard

Hitler and Stalin would have LOVED to have had a government funded television network at their disposal, Teach.

I'm pretty sure they did.

[FF2®]

Originally Posted by Warfish

So be it, lets all vote, and winner gets the decide, as it should be, what we spend or not.

We did.

We will.