Flipping The Big Bird
June 8, 2006 at 1:13 pm
Today’s Boston Globe quotes Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) on proposed cuts to public broadcating funding:
“Dick Cheney and the Republicans have decided to go hunting for `Big Bird’ and `Clifford the Big Red Dog’ once again. PBS is right at the top of their hit list — always has been and always will be, until they can destroy it.”
Colorful language – and since Rep. Markey gets all historical on us (”always has been,” he says), let’s join him on a trip down memory lane. You may not believe this, but public broadcasting actually has made it into the Democratic Party’s platforms. Repeatedly. Talk about your politicalization! Check out this rhetoric:
- 1972 Democratic platform: ”We deplore the Nixon Administration’s crude efforts to starve and muzzle public broadcasting.”
- 1984 Democratic platform: ” …efforts of the Reagan Administration to enact draconian cuts which would totally undermine the viability of this nation’s excellent public broadcasting system.”
- 1996 Democratic platform: “We are proud to have stopped the Republican attack on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting — we want our children to watch Sesame Street, not Power Rangers.”
Ouch! Those heated words are disturbing the peace in Mister Rogers’ neighborhood!
(thanks to powerline for the great photo)
vet222 said,
June 8, 2006 @ 3:39 pm
I love having the taxes I pay used to attack my family and values. Thanks PBS.
John F said,
June 8, 2006 @ 3:39 pm
Which show provides a better argument against public funding: NOW or Antiques Roadshow? David Brancaccio peddling agit-prop in tweedy drag, or 3rd-rate consumerism? At least Bill Moyers had a certain John Steinbeck-like charm and fetchingly refused to acknowledge any world view other than his own. How many stations have shows whose hosts are willing to compare themselves to Christ?
Bill Haverberg said,
June 8, 2006 @ 3:55 pm
That’s really pretty weak. Of course Democrats would defend PBS, just like they’d defend farm subsudies, student loans, or the ability to file for bankruptcy protection. Does this mean that all farmers, students, or debtors are in the pocket of the democractic party?
If there was ever a “cart before the horse” logical fallicy this is it.
Chris S. said,
June 8, 2006 @ 4:04 pm
Uh.. Bill,
When you’re going to attempt an attack on an opponents view, and you decide question the logic of their argument; it’s a good idea to learn to spell “fallacy” correctly. This is, of course, putting the cart before the horse.
Forbes said,
June 8, 2006 @ 4:07 pm
Yeah, there’s a lot of dreck on PBS. How many do-wop shows and reunions of one-hit wonders do PBS affiliates need to program each quarter? year? And now that high school history text books reflects mantra of PC multiculturalism–that which celebrates all different groups in equal measure–PBS programing follows suit. Why do taxpayers need to support the rewriting of history?
William Grubb said,
June 8, 2006 @ 4:45 pm
The most outrageous thing about public broadcasting besides its liberal bias is the complete dishonesty in fundraising. This is not primarily public or “viewer supported”, but rather government subsidized broadcasting. Without the government financed Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s financing, most local “public” radio and the majaroty of TV outlets would fold. The next time you are asked for a tax deductable contribution, you can be certain it will be said or implied that govenment financing is insignificant, when in fact it is indispensable to keeping the far left Democrat’s propaganda network on the air.
Ed said,
June 8, 2006 @ 5:02 pm
Could not PBS be self sustaining if it had retained at least some of the (merchandising) rights to such hits as Sesame St., This Old House and Barney? “PBS making liberals rich since the beginning.”
Daniel said,
June 8, 2006 @ 9:51 pm
So a Democrat says something completely in line with the Democratic platform for the last 30 years and it’s somehow hypocrisy? Oh, and did I spell everything right, making my argument better?
George said,
June 9, 2006 @ 4:48 am
I’m a recording engineer. I happened to work with an artist once at NPR in DC. I was floored by the obvious and over the top opulence in the studio. Those guys spent more money on that facility than any private studio I’ve ever seen (and I’ve seen quite a few). I asked one of the engineers how could this be? “Oh, well we have a huge budget and we have to spend it all every year or else someone might think we can get by with less.”
Big bird is one fat turkey. And don’t forget, send just &25.00 more and you get the tote bag as well.
Peter said,
June 9, 2006 @ 10:32 am
Forbes alluded to this already, but the plain fact is that PBS, NPR, et al, get significant, “indispensable” funding from the Fed. Why should ALL taxpayers be required to support organizations that obviously promote views from one side of the political spectrum?
Portorchardkid said,
June 9, 2006 @ 3:51 pm
The Seattle PBS station regularly features a program called “In The Life”. Gay, lesbian, transgender, bisexual matters. I would consider this to be, um, a little bit liberal.
Also, Bill (Butter wouldn’t melt in his mouth) Moyers (Now blissfully gone) and David (Smarmy) Brancaccio called their show a “news” program. Hee hee hee. Yeah, right.
I do try to watch Jim Lehrer regularly. He at least tries for balance.
Most of the Ken Burns history specials seem to stress America’s affair with slavery and how tough the African Americans have had it since then. I GET it, Ken. Don’t run it into the ground. It gets old. But the liberals love their victims and can’t stop reminding Americans of what cruel heartless people we are, and how terrible America is.
Portorchardkid said,
June 9, 2006 @ 4:09 pm
#
Daniel said, on June 8, 2006 @ 9:51 pm
“So a Democrat says something completely in line with the Democratic platform for the last 30 years and it’s somehow hypocrisy?”…snippage
No, the hypocrisy comes from claiming that PBS/NPR is neutral when it’s decidely left-wing. The hypocrisy comes from Democrats claiming they love PBS for Sesame Street (for their kids sake), and denying that they love it for its liberal leanings. (”Moyers? Liberal? Nonsense! Why, he had a conservative on just last year.”)
Portorchardkid said,
June 9, 2006 @ 4:44 pm
At the risk of MY commenting being run into the ground, I’ll try one more and promise this is the last for a while. I feel nobody really answered Bill Haverberg who said, “That’s really pretty weak. Of course Democrats would defend PBS, just like they’d defend farm subsudies, student loans, or the ability to file for bankruptcy protection. Does this mean that all farmers, students, or debtors are in the pocket of the democractic party?”
No, nobody said “all”, but political parties don’t back projects that won’t get them votes. Or at least hopefully won’t lose them votes. That’s why the Dems try to pass legislation friendly to unions in hopes of getting the union votes, and the Republicans are generally against gun control laws in order to garner the NRA vote. This should be obvious. You won’t find Repubs funding “Air America” or Dems sending off checks to keep Rush Limbaugh on the air.
If there is any doubt at all about which way PBS/NPR leans politically, look at who’s fighting for it, and who’s fighting against it. The Democratic party looks to these venues for free publicity of their political philosophy, and gets the taxpayer to fund it besides. Free propaganda and no drain on the DNC coffers. Which irritates Hell out of the Republicans. And me.