published Friday, March 25th, 2011

Good reasons to de-fund NPR

Taxpayer-funded National Public Radio has long denied that it has a liberal bias. But as you may be aware, in a recent hidden-camera video, NPR executives were caught making ugly, false claims against conservatives, plus other alarming remarks.

For a variety of good reasons, the U.S. House has since voted to de-fund NPR. The Senate should, too.

The video was made by the same organization that recently documented a Planned Parenthood clinic disgustingly advising a man and woman posing as traffickers of underage girls that the girls shouldn’t admit their ages because that would trigger reporting requirements.

In the latest video, the NPR executives are having lunch with two men posing as potential donors to the radio network. The men openly declare that their group is tied to the radical Muslim Brotherhood. (A cell of the Muslim Brotherhood was responsible for the 1981 assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat.)

The men praise NPR for presenting the “Palestinian viewpoint” and approvingly say their nickname for NPR is “National Palestinian Radio.” Replies one of the NPR executives: “Oh really? That’s good. I like that.”

One NPR official also eagerly attacks conservatives and the GOP.

“The current Republican Party is not really the Republican Party. It’s been hijacked by this group that is ... not just Islamophobic but, really, xenophobic,” said Ron Schiller, NPR’s now-departed main fundraiser. “They believe in sort of white, middle America, gun-toting — it’s scary. They’re seriously racist, racist people.”

Is it any wonder so many people consider NPR blatantly liberal?

On one point, though, we agree with Schiller. He said, “It is very clear that [NPR] would be better off in the long run without federal funding.” He added, “NPR would definitely survive, and most of the stations would survive [without tax dollars].”


NPR’s liberal bias, the fact that it can get by without taxpayer dollars and the fact that the federal government has no constitutional business subsidizing NPR are sound reasons why Congress should end its funding.

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
SeaMonkey said...

wow..funny how npr's view of repbulicans is exactly the same as many who post on this forum.. hambone, dude, blackwater, mountainlaurel, clara, alprova and whole a bunch more...

defund it please..with extreme prejudice.....

in reality..the democrat party has been taken over by anti-semites, pro radical islamists, anti- americans, socialists and communists....quite a mx, isn't it.

you libs/lefties only believe in free speech and freedom if it furthers your agenda.....

March 25, 2011 at 7:45 a.m.
hambone said...

And they say you can't stifle FREE SPEACH !

Congress can !

March 25, 2011 at 8:05 a.m.
bret said...

It's funny how the right-wingers didn't have a problem with funding Public Broadcasting during the 20 years that William F. Buckley was on the air spouting his Conservative views.

March 25, 2011 at 8:40 a.m.
hambone said...

L4F, Mr Murdoch funds Fox News very well. However I'm sure he would use taxpayer money if he could.

I will say that Fox's talking heads have to work harder than those on NPR. The ones on NPR just have to tell the truth, those on Fox have to work hard to slant everything negatively toward Obama, the Democrats and unions.

March 25, 2011 at 9:23 a.m.
acerigger said...

You guys are a bit behind the times aren't you? This video has been debunked, as it has been shown to be selectively edited to make the "inteviewee" appear to say things used out of context to the conversation. NPR,liberal? Maybe so when you understand that the truth does have a liberal bias!

March 25, 2011 at 9:49 a.m.
Sailorman said...

"the truth does have a liberal bias!"

ROFL spoken like a true believer. Why don't you tell us who debunked it? Never mind, I'll save you the embarrassment - Glenn Beck's website.

"OMG: James O'Keefe's NPR Sting Debunked By Glenn Beck Site"

Despite the obvious glee shown by KOS, the fact remains the NPR folks made some remarks that were monumentally stupid on their face.

Neither you nor the misguided hambone have shown any valid reason for a radio network to be taxpayer funded in this day and time.

March 25, 2011 at 10:40 a.m.
rockman12 said...

Yeah, de-fund the NPR. You wouldn't want anyone other than rich, old men being able to get a message out to the general public. Only once the NPR is gone then we can truly be the United Corporations of America. That's what the Republicans want anyways, jolly ol' England back, the rich own everything and the rest of the population are indentured servants.

March 25, 2011 at 12:53 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Don't really know much about NPR do you rockman.

Educate yourself even if it hurts

Same question as above: any valid reason for a radio network to be taxpayer funded in this day and time?

March 25, 2011 at 1:05 p.m.
acerigger said...

Contrary to the editorial's assertions, I see no reason to de-fund NPR. I'm curious though, how did NPR come to be (partially) federally funded anyway?

March 25, 2011 at 1:45 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 (47 U.S.C. § 396) courtesy of Lyndon B. Johnson.

And I see no reason to keep funding it. Another straw on the pile of money government spends.

March 25, 2011 at 2:20 p.m.
nucanuck said...

And I see NPR as a national and full of stories that bring American life alive for us all.

Liberal? Sometimes. Conservative? Sometimes. High quality journalism? Without a doubt.

But then again, maybe NPR just doesn't fit in the emerging hard, low culture America.

March 25, 2011 at 3:24 p.m.
acerigger said...

The biggest "straw" I see at the moment is the salaries and perks given to the current batch of legislators, state and federal!Where are the jobs?!

March 25, 2011 at 4:12 p.m.
Leaf said...

I'll just give more during the next pledge drive.

I'm left of what is now the center myself, but I think that NPR has gotten too much of a liberal bias over the last few years. It could be a reaction against "news" factories like Murdoch's empire, but it's starting to affect their reporting.

I think Robert Siegel in particular should tone down the slant a bit. His questions are often too leading. I'm interested in what the interviewee thinks, not Mr. Siegel.

March 25, 2011 at 4:13 p.m.
easttn said...

I have listen to the station. They same news played over and over. They have out live there life. It time to turn off the life support.Time to let them die in peace.

March 25, 2011 at 4:47 p.m.
ceeweed said...

There is a whole lot of manure I don't want to fund with my taxes. Like government agencies that assist corporations in moving jobs overseas. Like fighting wars in places where bombing them back into the stone age would actually propel them into the future. Like funding gangster bankers who were "to big to fail". Like subsidizing illegal aliens health care, rent, and education. The list could go on an on before I would even think to mention NPR, Plus, I would hate to lose " Car Talk"

March 25, 2011 at 10:06 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.