[Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?

Wed Mar 30 10:37:17 PDT 2011

N PR receives less than half it's funding from the government. It is not a 100% federal entity. Its management is private and so should it's funding. Your comparison with colleges is still apples and orange. You said " If you can tell me a better way for the US to spend it money, I'll listen." The problem is we are spending too much. We are head over heels in debt and need to cut many other things in addition to NPR funding. To name just a few OSHSA, EPA, planned ParentHood, and even waste in the military. I would not cut FDA or Child Protective Services. Both of these are more important that funding NPR. I was the Compliance officer for most of the feed companies I worked for.  I dealt with all of the agencies. EPA and OSHA were ridiculous.  We had some feed bend at Lewiston the bottom of witch were about 15 feet in the air. Feed sometimes hung up in them. We had to hang in the air with one hand and beat on them with a hammer with the other hand. To make it safer we install!
 ed a cat
walk bellow them to salve the problem. OSHSA made us take them out because the regulations sday you have to be able to walk down a cat walk. There was not room to do that, so we were back to clearing bins in an unsafe manner. There are many more examples I could site. FDA's regulations for the moist part made sense. Our food supply is very important. Most food business(not all) do their best to insure a safe food supply, but the FDA is short of inspectors and can not do their job adequately. Imports are not properly inspected either. When I started as manager of the feed mill in Colfax I put in a ridged control system and weigh back procedure for drug  use. The next day after I instructed the crew on the proper procedure, I caught an employee putting  a feed scoop in a drug bin walk over to the mixer and dump it in with Aureomycin falling off all the way. I fired him on the spot.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:41:23 -0700
To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?

> NPR is the NATIONAL PUBLIC radio. NPR was set up for exactly this reason: to
> have a state run radio station that does not risk genuine objectivity due to
> corporate interests. It is the only such radio station in existence, the
> only thing of its kind. Better one than none, I think.
> 
> Your question is kind of like asking, Why should we have state colleges? Why
> can't all colleges be private? The answer is the existence of state colleges
> is a public good: it keeps costs down, etc. I think ONE state run radio
> station should exist; it is a good way to use state funds, it has a general
> interest to the public. And really that is all that matters. If you can tell
> me of a better way for the US to spend its money, I'll listen. But so far
> you have not done that.
> 
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 9:48 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> 
> > Joe
> > I do not know how many times I have to say I do dont wish to see NPR
> > disappear. They have some very good programming. They receive only a portion
> > of their funding from the government. They can do just fine with out it.
> > Would you please explain to me, just why you think that NPR should receive
> > federal funding and Fox, NBC, ABC, CBS, etc should not.not?Comparing funding
> > of NPR to the military is like comparing apples and oranges.
> > Roger
> > -----Original message-----
> > From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:37:29 -0700
> > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?
> >
> > > I'm not angry, Roger. A bit frustrated but not angry.
> > >
> > > Listen slowly. I've taught logic for 20 years. I tell you your argument
> > is
> > > fallacious and you should believe me. To do otherwise shows a kind of
> > > arrogance and disrespect for longstanding social institutions.
> > >
> > > So it frustrates me. You have, thus far, given very bad arguments for not
> > > funding NPR. I've pointed out some problems: one might take the very
> > words
> > > you say and support some ridiculous claim. You acknowledge that the claim
> > is
> > > ridiculous ("Don't fund the military") but fail to see the logical
> > > connection between your very words and the claim. If the words support
> > your
> > > claim they also support the ridiculous claim; if the ridiculous claim is
> > > unsupported by your words, so is your claim. But you don't want to play
> > > because you think I'm biased.
> > >
> > > I'm not angry, I'm just very in-your-face. If you met me, I'd be in your
> > > face, too, but you'd see I wasn't angry.
> > >
> > > Roger, you have voted for an idiot for president twice, you've supported
> > for
> > > state office a man who is openly disrespectful to our Mormon community
> > and
> > > another man who is disrespectful to progressives, and you are now trying
> > to
> > > tell me that the world would be better off without NPR.
> > >
> > > I, on the other hand, think the world is better off with better sources
> > of
> > > information, sources that test our critical thinking skills. You can't
> > > compare NPR to Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc.
> > >
> > > I'd be more than happy to consider your opinion that NPR should not be
> > > funded but so far you have not given one non-fallacious argument in
> > support
> > > of that claim. So what am I to do? Accept your opinion because, well,
> > you're
> > > a nice guy and everyone is entitled to his position?
> > >
> > > No. This is public forum and I'm going to point out that, although you
> > have
> > > your own opinions which we are entitled to respect, it is my right and
> > duty
> > > to note that you do not have one damn good reason for believing them.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 10:01 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Shame on you. Your argument is illogical. You attribute things to me
> > that
> > > > arn't factual. Why do you seem so angry? I do not wish to see NPR fail.
> > I
> > > > hope that they continue to survive. Only a fraction of their funding
> > comes
> > > > from the government. Why should they recieve federal funding and Fox,
> > ABC,
> > > > NBC, CBS, etc. do not? None of them should receive federal funding.
> > That is
> > > > the only way to insure a free press.
> > > > Roger
> > > > -----Original message-----
> > > > From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
> > > > Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:09:00 -0700
> > > > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?
> > > >
> > > > > The point is NOT supported by you or anyone else. You radical right
> > wing
> > > > > folks think your views should be adopted for no other reason than
> > that
> > > > you
> > > > > believe them; because you believe it is true I should also. But that
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > > the case. We have a history of objective standards for judging the
> > merits
> > > > of
> > > > > reasons and argument. It is called the discipline of logic. If you
> > had
> > > > more
> > > > > respect for the history of Western civilization and public
> > institutions
> > > > you
> > > > > would realize that. The fact that you ignore those is no ones fault
> > but
> > > > your
> > > > > own. Shame on you. Worse, you want to promote further ignorance by
> > > > > disallowing legitimate news sources (NPR) and gutting education. That
> > way
> > > > > even fewer people will be able to see through your irrational
> > rhetoric.
> > > > >
> > > > > But here in a nut shell is the issue for all fair minded people to
> > see.
> > > > You
> > > > > have nothing but fallacious arguments and unsupported accusations to
> > > > support
> > > > > your claims. Nothing at all. The nameless "Glenn" is in the exact
> > same
> > > > boat.
> > > > >
> > > > > The real issue is, like with respect to military funding, whether the
> > > > source
> > > > > funded provides a public good. Whether it is "slightly right" or
> > > > "slightly
> > > > > left" is completely irrelevant. Shame on you!
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:53 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The point is that is they should not be funded period. It makes no
> > > > > > difference whether they are right, left or down the center.
> > > > > > Roger
> > > > > > -----Original message-----
> > > > > > From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
> > > > > > Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:42:44 -0700
> > > > > > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > No Roger, Glenn did not answer the question. Glenn made several
> > > > > > fallacious
> > > > > > > points, some of which were pointed out and all of which are
> > ignored
> > > > > > below.
> > > > > > > And do you also support slavery, another view that "Glenn"
> > supports?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why bother pretending to engage in discussions about these issues
> > if
> > > > you
> > > > > > > IGNORE criticisms of points made? Here is another refutation of
> > one
> > > > of
> > > > > > your
> > > > > > > points. Please respond.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You write that NPR is "[s]lightly left of center" [even though
> > you
> > > > admit
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > listening to it only "occasionally" and do not provide ONE
> > example
> > > > > > > supporting this claim]. If this is a reason to not fund NPR via
> > > > taxpayer
> > > > > > > money, then the following would also be a good argument: The
> > military
> > > > is
> > > > > > > slightly right of center, so it should not receive any public
> > > > funding.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So which is it: should we end public support for the military or
> > > > should
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > recognize that your argument is a bad one?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:54 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have not been on the computer all week, but I think that
> > Glenn
> > > > > > answered
> > > > > > > > your question.
> > > > > > > > In response ro Nick- I do not know it Nader is right or not.I
> > have
> > > > only
> > > > > > > > listened to NPR occasionally. What I have caught is Fresh Air
> > or
> > > > All
> > > > > > Things
> > > > > > > > Considered. They both at the times I heard them seemed to be
> > > > lightly
> > > > > > left of
> > > > > > > > center. Nader only mentioned Charlie Rose. I am sure there a
> > lot of
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > > > hosts besides Rose. I have never heard him. In any event this
> > is
> > > > all
> > > > > > > > irrelevant. It would not make any difference if they were
> > equally
> > > > > > balanced
> > > > > > > > or were 100% to the right. They should not be geting any
> > funding
> > > > from
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > taxpayers. In case you don't realize it we are in a money
> > crunch.
> > > > Let
> > > > > > spend
> > > > > > > > only on those thing that are essential and can not be done
> > > > adequately
> > > > > > by the
> > > > > > > > private sector. I want to see our veterans taken care of for
> > just
> > > > one
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > many that we should be spending on. Your ideal Nation of Sweden
> > is
> > > > > > geting
> > > > > > > > the message and cutting back on services before they wind up
> > like
> > > > > > Greece and
> > > > > > > > Ireland. I hope they succeed, that is the ancestral home of the
> > > > > > Falen's.
> > > > > > > > They come from Ostergotlund.
> > > > > > > > You may know  where that is.
> > > > > > > > Roger
> > > > > > > > -----Original message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
> > > > > > > > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:27:38 -0700
> > > > > > > > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > State one left wing point of view that NPR broadcasts, Roger.
> > > > Just
> > > > > > one.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > They broadcast news. You are so used to listening to the lies
> > on
> > > > Fox
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > you confuse them for "points of view."
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:17 AM, lfalen <
> > lfalen at turbonet.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If  NPR wants to broadcast left wing points of view and
> > > > supporters
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > willing to fund it, more power to them.
> > > > > > > > > > Roger
> > > > > > > > > > -----Original message-----
> > > > > > > > > > From: "Robert Dickow" dickow at turbonet.com
> > > > > > > > > > Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 02:18:10 -0700
> > > > > > > > > > To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I hear that the conservative congressmen have proposed
> > > > > > withdrawing
> > > > > > > > > > > government funding for NPR. Apparently a newscaster or
> > fund
> > > > drive
> > > > > > > > person
> > > > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > somebody made some disparaging remarks about the Tea
> > Party.
> > > > Fie!
> > > > > > Fie!
> > > > > > > > > > Now,
> > > > > > > > > > > denying public broadcasting all those scarce taxpayer
> > dollars
> > > > > > sounds
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > reasonable and just response to such offenses if you're a
> > > > > > > > conservative
> > > > > > > > > > > Republican sympathetic with the Tea Party movement,
> > right? Uh
> > > > > > > > huh.sure.
> > > > > > > > > > How
> > > > > > > > > > > dumb can anybody be?! NPR won't suddenly go belly up and
> > go
> > > > off
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > air,
> > > > > > > > > > > slinking off into the shadows with its tail between its
> > legs.
> > > > > > Private
> > > > > > > > > > > donors-- those dwindling middle class stalwarts-- will
> > > > valiantly
> > > > > > step
> > > > > > > > up
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > the plate in ever greater numbers. So what will actually
> > > > happen,
> > > > > > > > then, is
> > > > > > > > > > > that NPR will be unfettered and free to unleash all their
> > > > rabid
> > > > > > > > commie
> > > > > > > > > > pinko
> > > > > > > > > > > liberal gun-hating womens libber staffers to say all the
> > > > rabid
> > > > > > commie
> > > > > > > > > > pinko
> > > > > > > > > > > tea-barfing they've always wanted to say but didn't
> > because
> > > > they
> > > > > > felt
> > > > > > > > > > > compelled to be balanced in their commie pinko
> > tree-hugging
> > > > > > opinions
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > bleeding-heart liberal union thug biased news reporting.
> > > > Clearly,
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > government measure will not serve the common good. And I
> > may
> > > > be
> > > > > > > > forced to
> > > > > > > > > > > mix even more metaphors in the future.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Bob Dickow, troublemaker
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > =======================================================
> > > > > > > > > >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > > > > > > > > >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > > > > > > > > >               http://www.fsr.net
> > > > > > > > > >          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > > > > > > > > > =======================================================
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
>