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.
What's insane about it? What specifically is so wrong about this? Saying it's wrong and not giving me a reason suggests your only mad because you've been trained to be mad at things like this becasue of political bias. Put some thought into it, not just meaningless dribble.
Would you be okay with Rush Limbaugh's radio show being subsidized with fed taxdollars?
What's insane about it? What specifically is so wrong about this? Saying it's wrong and not giving me a reason suggests your only mad because you've been trained to be mad at things like this becasue of political bias. Put some thought into it, not just meaningless dribble.
It's so stupid I wouldn't pay for it with Monopoly money let alone real cash. It's just a dumb question that could only ooze from the sludge bucket we call the Liberal Mind.
Would you be okay with Rush Limbaugh's radio show being subsidized with fed taxdollars?
Not with Rush, no. He's not objective enough. NPR is definitely more left leaning, but they are reasonably moderate. Rush is very extreme and frankly sort of unprofessional.
I wouldn't have a problem with a more conservative version of NPR existing with public funds though. The thing is, most conservatives wouldn't want to have their radio show publicly funded, which I'm guessing is a large part of why things like NPR tend to lean left. I know that hurts the conspiracy theory of Obama's communist regime, but the reason things like that are more left leaning is probably a lot more straightforward and transparent than most are willing to make it.
Just as a side note, a friend of mine works for my state's public television networks, which had broadcasted conservatives interviews and media and such. She told me that conservatives constantly compliment the station for it's good programming, but usually add in a little jab about it being publicly funded.
My point being that I think you and Mr. Limbaugh would have more of a problem with Rush being publicly funded that me.
Most of these responses suggest no one here can read.
The article asks a question then shows tweets of different responses, most of which seem to come from a pretty politically indifferent standpoint. Only a handful made it a social issue and acted like other cultures (well, white people) cooking another culture's food is bad. The overwhelming majority seemed to think there was no problem with cross culture cooking (or whatever we want to call it) is perfectly acceptable.
But hey, it's cool to see that four year olds are capable of using computers and reading NPR article, because no respectable adult would ever make a post just to call an ideology stupid using a misleading title to gain support for his completely and obvious BS. I hope your mom splurges and gets you the honey nut cheerios. You deserve it!
Not with Rush, no. He's not objective enough. NPR is definitely more left leaning, but they are reasonably moderate. Rush is very extreme and frankly sort of unprofessional.
I wouldn't have a problem with a more conservative version of NPR existing with public funds though. The thing is, most conservatives wouldn't want to have their radio show publicly funded, which I'm guessing is a large part of why things like NPR tend to lean left. I know that hurts the conspiracy theory of Obama's communist regime, but the reason things like that are more left leaning is probably a lot more straightforward and transparent than most are willing to make it.
Just as a side note, a friend of mine works for my state's public television networks, which had broadcasted conservatives interviews and media and such. She told me that conservatives constantly compliment the station for it's good programming, but usually add in a little jab about it being publicly funded.
My point being that I think you and Mr. Limbaugh would have more of a problem with Rush being publicly funded that me.
So you don't mind making your neighbor pay for a radio show, so long as you approve of the content. Gotcha. No taxpayers dollars should be use to fund radio programming regardless of bias or content.
It's so stupid I wouldn't pay for it with Monopoly money let alone real cash. It's just a dumb question that could only ooze from the sludge bucket we call the Liberal Mind.
And when Rush asks if Obama is a communist, to which anyone who knows anything about communism can firmly answer "NO," do you have the same reaction? And if so, does that mean you think Rush shouldn't have a show?
The issue of what you think of the question is pointless. The question is one that interests many, and I already explained my logic. This forum is so against discussion, it's ridiculous. I don't know if it's just too hard for people to be critical or what, but why is asking a question that many are interested in, wrong just because you think the question is stupid? Which is a valid opinion, but also, sort of irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.
And just as a point of reference, I went to NPR's home page and the top two articles on there right now are about an IRS tax scam and scientific study on laughter. The last one is definitely less valuable in a big picture sense but informative non the less, but the first one seems like a relevant discussion that would interest people across the political spectrum. People are using the one article from NPR to justify an opinion on NPR and liberals as a whole, which I find to be frankly ridiculous.
So you don't mind making your neighbor pay for a radio show, so long as you approve of the content. Gotcha. No taxpayers dollars should be use to fund radio programming regardless of bias or content.
I actually didn't say that. I very clearly said I would have no problem with a conservative version of NPR existing, despite me not being a conservative. I explained why one doesn't exist but I'm guessing that goes against your magical narrative of evil, communist Obama? Is that the issue?
The only content requirement I have is that the content is in some way informative. I'd prefer no political bias at all and use it primarily as a means of education and base line level news. As in, just the story; not a version of the story to appeal to a certain demographic or an opinionated version of the story, but the actual story. If an NPR article surfaces that provides evidence the Bernie Sanders had attempted to steal confidential files from the Clinton campaign or something, my opinion on this issue would not shift, despite me not liking what I would be hearing.
The only "liberal" aspect in this discussion is in the minds of the wing-nuts who see liberals lurking behind every tree. Get over it. The topic is food. Why this is in the Politics category is beyond me. Move it to the Food category.
When is it OK to profit...? When you have mastered the cuisine and people beat a path to your door to get their hands on some and are willing to pay.
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.
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.
