Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Huh! That's about twice as much as they give NPR, yet all the RWs on here were talking about how a drop in the bucket can eventually fill the ocean, etc, when it came to NPRs funding.
You obviously don't know the difference between, "giving" money to NPR and Advertising money.
Obviously Democrats are serious about cutting federal spending. Why else would they propose an amendment to forbid the Pentagon from spending money sponsoring NASCAR?
Yup, we can cut hundreds of billions if we go line by line thru the budget, and eliminate wasteful government spending. But obviously 0bama already did that, right?
Particularly since the Navy has already stopped NASCAR sponsorship, as have the Marines.
It should be eliminated, but it's a moot point - the amendment was voted down.
It's a shame. I certainly agree with the Republicans on more issues than Democrats, but if they can't bring themselves to cut a measely $7M, why should we take them seriously when they talk about making the necessary cuts and sacrifices to reduce the budget? I'm glad $60B was cut...it's a good start, but refusing to cut something as trivial as $7M is ridiculous, IMO. I don't care if it's a drop in the bucket or if it even put to decent use. If we can live without it, cut it.
You obviously don't know the difference between, "giving" money to NPR and Advertising money.
\
Essentially we are giving the money. How they use it is up to them. There's no difference.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.