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.<br>
<br>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.<br>
<br>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!<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:53 AM, lfalen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
The point is that is they should not be funded period. It makes no difference whether they are right, left or down the center.<br>
Roger<br>
-----Original message-----<br>
From: Joe Campbell <a href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</a><br>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 11:42:44 -0700<br>
To: lfalen <a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?<br>
<br>
> No Roger, Glenn did not answer the question. Glenn made several fallacious<br>
> points, some of which were pointed out and all of which are ignored below.<br>
> And do you also support slavery, another view that "Glenn" supports?<br>
><br>
> Why bother pretending to engage in discussions about these issues if you<br>
> IGNORE criticisms of points made? Here is another refutation of one of your<br>
> points. Please respond.<br>
><br>
> You write that NPR is "[s]lightly left of center" [even though you admit to<br>
> listening to it only "occasionally" and do not provide ONE example<br>
> supporting this claim]. If this is a reason to not fund NPR via taxpayer<br>
> money, then the following would also be a good argument: The military is<br>
> slightly right of center, so it should not receive any public funding.<br>
><br>
> So which is it: should we end public support for the military or should we<br>
> recognize that your argument is a bad one?<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:54 AM, lfalen <<a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> > I have not been on the computer all week, but I think that Glenn answered<br>
> > your question.<br>
> > In response ro Nick- I do not know it Nader is right or not.I have only<br>
> > listened to NPR occasionally. What I have caught is Fresh Air or All Things<br>
> > Considered. They both at the times I heard them seemed to be lightly left of<br>
> > center. Nader only mentioned Charlie Rose. I am sure there a lot of other<br>
> > hosts besides Rose. I have never heard him. In any event this is all<br>
> > irrelevant. It would not make any difference if they were equally balanced<br>
> > or were 100% to the right. They should not be geting any funding from the<br>
> > taxpayers. In case you don't realize it we are in a money crunch. Let spend<br>
> > only on those thing that are essential and can not be done adequately by the<br>
> > private sector. I want to see our veterans taken care of for just one of<br>
> > many that we should be spending on. Your ideal Nation of Sweden is geting<br>
> > the message and cutting back on services before they wind up like Greece and<br>
> > Ireland. I hope they succeed, that is the ancestral home of the Falen's.<br>
> > They come from Ostergotlund.<br>
> > You may know where that is.<br>
> > Roger<br>
> > -----Original message-----<br>
> > From: Joe Campbell <a href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</a><br>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:27:38 -0700<br>
> > To: lfalen <a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a><br>
> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?<br>
> ><br>
> > > State one left wing point of view that NPR broadcasts, Roger. Just one.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > They broadcast news. You are so used to listening to the lies on Fox that<br>
> > > you confuse them for "points of view."<br>
> > ><br>
> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 10:17 AM, lfalen <<a href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> > ><br>
> > > > If NPR wants to broadcast left wing points of view and supporters are<br>
> > > > willing to fund it, more power to them.<br>
> > > > Roger<br>
> > > > -----Original message-----<br>
> > > > From: "Robert Dickow" <a href="mailto:dickow@turbonet.com">dickow@turbonet.com</a><br>
> > > > Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 02:18:10 -0700<br>
> > > > To: <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
> > > > Subject: [Vision2020] No government support for NPR et al?<br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > > I hear that the conservative congressmen have proposed withdrawing<br>
> > > > > government funding for NPR. Apparently a newscaster or fund drive<br>
> > person<br>
> > > > or<br>
> > > > > somebody made some disparaging remarks about the Tea Party. Fie! Fie!<br>
> > > > Now,<br>
> > > > > denying public broadcasting all those scarce taxpayer dollars sounds<br>
> > like<br>
> > > > a<br>
> > > > > reasonable and just response to such offenses if you're a<br>
> > conservative<br>
> > > > > Republican sympathetic with the Tea Party movement, right? Uh<br>
> > huh.sure.<br>
> > > > How<br>
> > > > > dumb can anybody be?! NPR won't suddenly go belly up and go off the<br>
> > air,<br>
> > > > > slinking off into the shadows with its tail between its legs. Private<br>
> > > > > donors-- those dwindling middle class stalwarts-- will valiantly step<br>
> > up<br>
> > > > to<br>
> > > > > the plate in ever greater numbers. So what will actually happen,<br>
> > then, is<br>
> > > > > that NPR will be unfettered and free to unleash all their rabid<br>
> > commie<br>
> > > > pinko<br>
> > > > > liberal gun-hating womens libber staffers to say all the rabid commie<br>
> > > > pinko<br>
> > > > > tea-barfing they've always wanted to say but didn't because they felt<br>
> > > > > compelled to be balanced in their commie pinko tree-hugging opinions<br>
> > and<br>
> > > > > bleeding-heart liberal union thug biased news reporting. Clearly,<br>
> > this<br>
> > > > > government measure will not serve the common good. And I may be<br>
> > forced to<br>
> > > > > mix even more metaphors in the future.<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > > Bob Dickow, troublemaker<br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > > ><br>
> > > ><br>
> > > > =======================================================<br>
> > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,<br>
> > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
> > > > <a href="http://www.fsr.net" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a><br>
> > > > mailto:<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
> > > > =======================================================<br>
> > > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> ><br>
><br>
><br>
</blockquote></div><br>