October 3, 2011

What NPR's new CEO "would really like to see is depoliticizing NPR a little bit, so that it's not caught in those [political] cross hairs."

NPR's new leader, Gary E. Knell, comes from the world of children's television — "Sesame Street" and so forth. That's an... interesting solution to a political problem. The NPR board claims it was "looking for someone who, while he or she might not be a journalist, would gain the respect of journalists." And "Sesame Street" was the place to go for that? The question raised is: Where were all the leaders in the field of journalism? Were they all too politicized to get NPR out of the "cross hairs"? (I think "crosshairs" is one word, but that's the way NPR writes it.)
Over the past year, NPR has been roiled by a series of controversies — including the termination of the contract of news analyst Juan Williams last October, followed by an undercover video sting by the conservative provocateur James O'Keefe III in March. An edited version of the video released by O'Keefe appeared to show NPR's top fundraiser disparaging Republicans and Tea Party conservatives, though a closer review of the complete video showed many of those remarks were presented in a profoundly misleading way.

Much of NPR's senior leadership was swept away, including its news chief, the fundraising official and its chief executive, Vivian Schiller.

Congressional Republicans also renewed a push to cut all federal funding for the public radio system. That push fell short. But NPR's board — which is dominated by member stations that rely on federal money much more heavily than NPR itself — took the funding threat very seriously.
Solution? A man associated only with children's television.
Knell... wants to get out of the way of its journalists, whom he called "amazingly fabulous."

"The point here is that it's not about liberal or conservative. It's about fairness," Knell said. "We've got to make the case that we're delivering a fair service — not only in the way we do our jobs but in the way we disseminate the news."
Make the case... Knell, by the way, is a lawyer.
Several former commercial TV network news executives said they would not allow themselves to be considered seriously for the position in part because of the recent political turmoil surrounding the network.
Can you read between those lines? I'm guessing they didn't want their work examined for political bias.

83 comments:

Lincolntf said...

NPR: Radio for Americans terrified of getting information that isn't Government approved.

Bob_R said...

They really would be better served getting off public funds. They are superior in many ways to their mainstream liberal competitors. I may mock the NYT and WaPo, but I don't have to pay for them. Their only real problem with politics is their lack of self-awareness. They seem to believe that they are actually "centrist."

chuck said...

After putting the crosshairs on NPR's statement and giving it a read, I think it best to keep NPR downrange and stock up on ammo.

FWBuff said...

Didn't Sarah Palin get lambasted for using crosshairs on her website? What's with the violent rhetoric, NPR?

YoungHegelian said...

"....though a closer review of the complete video showed many of those remarks were presented in a profoundly misleading way."

Sure they were. That's why the board fired them anyway.

If NPR was actually trying to look "depoliticized" they could have, you know, actually hired a conservative. If, like, they knew any...

BarryD said...

"though a closer review of the complete video showed many of those remarks were presented in a profoundly misleading way"

If that were true, then why did they boot all of their leadership? Would it not have been easier to simply show the complete video, and defuse the whole incident?

And "fairness"? FAIRNESS is when I am not forced to pay for stuff I don't watch, don't listen to, and don't care about at all. It would be unfair if I were forced to pay for ABC, Fox, or CNN. But I am not. So I don't give a crap about what they broadcast.

Robert Cook said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
BarryD said...

BTW I have always figured that NPR and its member stations existed primarily so that Garrison Keillor would have a lucrative sinecure. I've heard his show often enough over the years that I can't imagine that he'd do all that well in the marketplace.

Robert Cook said...

"Depoliticizing."

Hahahaha! NPR already is as bland and insipid a source of "political" news as can be imagined.

Schweddy Balls, indeed!

MadisonMan said...

I actually listened to NPR this morning -- first time in months -- and this move struck me as something NPR did so they could say See? See? We're doing something! to people/corporations who donate.

BarryD said...

Here's an idea from the Internet age.

Fully privatize NPR, its members, and the Post Office. Merge them into a corporation. Let that corporation do whatever it wants, within legal bounds of course. Good luck!

AJ Lynch said...

Here is another idea- put a price tag on the annual cost of the post office and NPR and place it on a national referendum so the voters can decide if they want to pay it.

YoungHegelian said...

@Robert Cook

"Hahahaha! NPR already is as bland and insipid a source of "political" news as can be imagined. "

You say that from the left, but I agree with you from the right. NPR is all about stroking its listeners cherished assumptions, and those assumptions are center-left Democratic.

Hard-core lefties are almost as absent from NPR as are righties. Matter of fact, Fox News has many more true leftie guests on its news programs than NPR does.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

@BarryD et al.

In my recollection, the shakeup in NPR management was due to the Juan Williams thing, not the James O'Keefe thing.

BarryD said...

NPR and the Post Office are pretty far down the list of things that would invite such a solution.

I'm guessing a broad-ranging set of such referenda could balance the Federal budget within a year. Lots of political oxen would be gored on either side of the aisle, of course.

BarryD said...

@Tyrone, you're right.

However, they don't seem to be telling it quite that way. I.e., they're still politically biased, in that they're taking the opportunity to get a jab in on "conservatives", and they're also lying. National Propaganda Radio.

Note that propadanda does tend to be extremely bland, also.

Scott M said...

Hahahaha! NPR already is as bland and insipid a source of "political" news as can be imagined.

The obligatory sound fx over and after the first line in their field stories...ugh...it's the equivalent of nails on a chalkboard for anyone that's been in professional audio production. There's style backed by talent, like The Edge, then there's just awfulness, like Billy Joe Armstrong, which is neither.

NPR is the Billy Joe Armstrong of radio news. He would probably be stupid enough to consider that a compliment.

Clyde said...

I can see the new NPR "sensitivity" video now, featuring Bert and Ernie:

BERT: Hey, Ernie, did you see that a new couple moved in next door?

ERNIE: Yes, Bert. I took them a pie to welcome them to the neighborhood. But, Bert... They're not our kind of people...

BERT: "Not our kind of people"? Ernie, we're tolerant liberals, EVERYONE is "our kind of people!"

ERNIE: Not the new neighbors, Bert. I... I saw some books on their coffee table.

BERT: That's good. Everyone should read more, and that's a message brought to you by the letters A, B, C, D --

ERNIE: No, Bert! You don't understand! The books were Going Rogue by Sarah Palin and Decision Points by George W. Bush! They're REPUBLICANS, Bert!

BERT: Oh my God!

ERNIE: Not that there's anything wrong with that!

VOICEOVER: Ernie's right! As tolerant liberals here at NPR, not everyone is OUR kind of people. But since some of them are in charge of the appropriations process, we have to pretend that they are. They may be like Oscar the Grouch, wanting to drag the nation down into their garbage can, but since we are far more clever than they are, we can work around them as long as we are not overtly political. Remember, burrow from within, the ends justify the means, and by any means necessary. Thank you.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

We've got to make the case that we're delivering a fair service — not only in the way we do our jobs but in the way we disseminate the news."

One way to 'make the case' that you are impartial would to actually BE impartial.

Try that for a while. Bet you can't.

Kurt said...

YoungHegelian writes: "NPR is all about stroking its listeners cherished assumptions, and those assumptions are center-left Democratic."

I think that's definitely the case, but it's worth noting that what is "center-left" in today's Democrat party is considerably further left than it was 11 years ago. Even 10 years ago, NPR was part of the "why do they hate us?" crowd.

I've been listening to NPR since I was in graduate school in the late 1980s. I nearly stopped listening when the bias became so much more blatant to me during the 2004 election. Now, though, I listen mainly to monitor the sorts of things the supposedly "reasonable" left believes. I wonder how many other folks here listen for the same reason?

Quayle said...

Meanwhile, over at the New York Times, former editor Bill Keller made a big noise about how the candidates' religions and religious beliefs need to be closely and carefully examined.

This past weekend, the Mormons held their Semi-annual worldwide General Conference in Salt Lake City, at which the top 15 leaders spoke. (One of my favorite was on caring for the poor.)

So, certainly the New York Times was there and is now using it as a primary source to report on the religions and religious beliefs of Mitt Romney and John Huntsman (not to forget Harry Reid.)

We'll you'd be tempted to think that, but you'd be wrong.

So far, crickets over at the Times.

Scott M said...

it's worth noting that what is "center-left" in today's Democrat party is considerably further left than it was 11 years ago.

True. I realized this when Bill Maher called Hillary Clinton a centerist. This was just after I had read "It Takes A Village".

YoungHegelian said...

@Kurt,

I agree with you that the center left is more multi-culti left than it was even ten years ago, and that NPR reflects that.

My point is that you never hear the voice of self-proclaimed Marxists, socialists, "race" men, or radical feminists like you do on Fox News.

Fox likes these people because they like the Sturm und Drang and they prove the right's thesis that their are lots of crazy lefties in positions of influence in this country.

NPR avoids these people for the same reason that buff gays avoid swishes: they're afraid they'll be outed if they get asked the wrong questions.

Amartel said...

He wants to tone down the propaganda just enough so NPR's bias isn't so overwhelmingly obvious as to draw Congressional attention. Just "a little bit." He still wants the taxpayer-funding but without the hassle of justifying the cheerleading for one side while sliming the other.

He's got years of experience indoctrinating children. New job duties are not that different.

Jeff with one 'f' said...

What's hilarious is the assumption that "Sesame Street" et al are not politicized as well. All of PBS's (as well as Nickleodeon's) children's programming is heavily invested in teaching children whatever progressive bien pensant thing is on any given topic.

Jeff with one 'f' said...

bien pensant thinking

Jeff with one 'f' said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Pogo said...

Why Sesame Street?

Because G is for government and gimme and journalism.

Pogo said...

The Powerline guys were approached by a bleg for their readers to participate in a survey by NPR of conservatives.

Here is my most recent e-mail, which is their reply to my completed survey.

"Dear [Pogo]:

You may remember the public broadcasting effort to better understand the views and insights of those who identify as Republican or conservative. The Public Insight Network wants to pose questions and reflect the views of conservatives through the 2012 election.

We sent you a survey and asked you to tell us who you would support if forced to choose a candidate. You told us - Rick Perry. Since then Rick Perry has joined the race while Tim Pawlenty has dropped out. Issues like the HPV vaccine and the future of Social Security have gotten the attention of press reports.

We’re wondering if that has changed at all. Tell us by clicking the link below.

We also asked you previously: “What personal experience or aspect of your life explains why a candidate’s messages resonate or not?”

You said: "(redacted blah blah blah)"

We believe your experiences shape your views. Sharing a bit of those experiences can lead to greater understanding among people. So, we’d like to ask you a follow up question: When did you know that you leaned Republican/conservative/libertarian?

Tell us by clicking right here.

Our long-term goal is to create an online space where active citizens like you can share with others in a meaningful way. We plan to provide an online platform for the 2012 election that features the views of citizens from the ground level. Soon we will roll out that discussion page, and we plan to let you know about it.

Meanwhile, please consider taking a minute to share these insights now.

Thanks for your consideration.

Michael Caputo
American Public Media
"

Robert Cook said...

"True. I realized this when Bill Maher called Hillary Clinton a centerist."

Hahahahaha!

Hillary is, at heart, the Republican she began as. In fact, today's Democratic Party at large is equivalent, at best, to the liberal wing of the Republican Party of 1970 or thereabouts.

Anyone who thinks there is a functioning "left" wing of the Democratic Party today is deluded.

This reveals, actually, how far to the extreme right the right wing has gone in the last several decades. Those considered to be in the "mainstream" of conservative thinking today would have been rightly seen as dangerous John Bircher-ite extremists 50 years ago.

Roger J. said...

NPR as I recall has the talking heads David Brooks and EJ Dionne--Brooks is the kind of conservative you have around to invite to liberal cocktail parties so you say you are impartial--Dionne is simply batshit crazy.

I do like science Friday though.

Let NPR go public and it will go the way of air america. Their basic market segment is too narrow, and as been pointed out above, they cater to their market segment for their fund raising ops.

Scott M said...

Those considered to be in the "mainstream" of conservative thinking today would have been rightly seen as dangerous John Bircher-ite extremists 50 years ago.

Interesting comment given that the Great Society crap started roughly 50 years ago and we're about to crumble under it's weight. I suppose you expect us all to simple sit back, relax, and let our betters handle things?

Tibore said...

"The NPR board claims it was "looking for someone who, while he or she might not be a journalist, would gain the respect of journalists." And "Sesame Street" was the place to go for that?"

Well... from one puppet show to another, right? ;)

YoungHegelian said...

@Robert Cook,

"Anyone who thinks there is a functioning "left" wing of the Democratic Party today is deluded."

No, Robert. There you are wrong.

The nature of the Left has changed since the fall of the Soviet Union. The old Marxist Left, the Left of class-consciousness, unions, the proleteriat, etc. is indeed moribund. But, the post-Marxist Left of identity politics is in its floruit, and has effectively taken over the "left" wing of the Democratic Party.

The nature of the international left has changed so much in my 54 years that we don't even really have the vocabulary to describe the changes yet. It's as chaotic as the Left was pre-Marx.

Roger J. said...

"gain the respect of journalists...."

LOL--as trooper would say if he werent fitting bras, the only thing worse than a lawyer is a journalist.

Or was it the other way around? probably interchangeable

prairie wind said...

I like the Story Corps segment on Friday mornings...because I am always game for another story of gays coming out to their families and friends. That's an exaggeration, of course, but only an exaggeration.

I listen to NPR because there are no commercials.

george said...

I love the passive aggressive stuff with O'Keefe. That is NPR in a nutshell. They get caught in their bias and then they smear the people who caught them while saying they won't do it anymore.

These people are extremely unsophisticated. That is why they have to constantly stroke themselves about how sophisticated they are.

Pragmatist said...

Here is how it works. The Right Wing Media Machine continues to make the false and baseless claim that the "mainstream" media has a liberal bias (of course totally ignoring their own conservative bias). The "mainstream media", i e the Corporate media owned and run by such "liberal" corporations like Disney or Viacomm, then begin to slant their news to the Right to avoid the label. Even NPR, trying to placate the reactionaries in Congress, begins to slant their coverage to the Right. What we end up with is American Pravda: the Orwellian "fair and balanced" FOX, the Corporate Media and a fearful, will play ball with soft stories NPR. Any dissent...liberal bias, Right Wing bias, perfectly OK.

Joe said...

quayle, there are crickets because general conference is boring as hell and covers the same ground every six months. Almost all the talks are insipid and have little theological relevance.

E.M. Davis said...

And I used to think they were a Mickey Mouse organization.

Scott M said...

Nice, Pragmatist. Submitting that corps like Viacomm and Disney are right-wing by putting quotes around liberal. No mention of GE, I see, nor what makes Viacomm and Disney right-wing.

homo Ĺ“conomicus said...

Is this the same guy who's responsible for this?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/17/eveningnews/main3725571.shtml


The first few seasons have just been released and come with, of all things, a warning.

"These early Sesame Street episodes are intended for grownups and may not suit the needs of today's preschool child," the warning reads.

Robert Cook said...

"Interesting comment given that the Great Society crap started roughly 50 years ago and we're about to crumble under it's weight."

We're not crumbling under the weight of any "Great Society" programs or thinking at all. We're collapsing as a result of the innate character of the corporate/captialist system.

When reigned in sharply by government regulation and oversight, and where monopolies are prohibited--so nothing can become "too big to fail", among other reasons--and where tax rates are fair and salaries good for even the working classes, a managed capitalist system can be and has been a great engine for making life better for most.

Corporations today are essentially sovereign entities who suffer naught for their sins of excess and greed and we pay for their losses and they pay nothing for their crimes. Our economic circumstances are not the accidental result of an inept chief executive, but the predictable and even desired outcome of decades of policy shifts intended to benefit the financial elites. These financial elites pay their lobbyists millions to influence and effect the policies that are enriching the already rich and impoverishing the rest of us.

edutcher said...

Let them go commercial and see how they compete amongst the other Lefty media.

My guess is the only thing keeping them afloat in a year will be Big Bird.

If they're lucky.

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

Can you read between those lines? I'm guessing they didn't want their work examined for political bias.

In a way, that's a grim statement of fear of censorship.

But considering that NPR's 'diversity' runs from center-left to far-left, some of those gleaming candidates might feel 'uncomfortable' to encounter any remarks whatever from the part of the spectrum totally excluded by NPR.

Quaestor said...

An edited version of the video released by O'Keefe appeared to show NPR's top fundraiser disparaging Republicans and Tea Party conservatives, though a closer review of the complete video showed many of those remarks were presented in a profoundly misleading way.

"Appeared to show..." If Mr. Knell wants to restore NPR's credibility he first needs to own up to the blatant bias and antisemitism O'Keefe's video sting revealed. I've seen the unedited video (it runs more than 30 minutes, and is very boring except for the meaty bits we've all seen before) and there is nothing misleading about O'Keefe's edit. His "Muslims" bag-man solicited anti-Israel and anti-conservative remarks from Schiller and he gladly complies.

Knell is his work cut out for him, and given his expressed attitude it looks like he's unwilling to take up the task.

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

Hard-core lefties are almost as absent from NPR as are righties.

Try listening to your local NPR station's 'news and information' on Saturday sometime. You might change your mind.

David said...

Misdirection.

YoungHegelian said...

@Insufficiently Sensitive,

I do listen on Saturdays, and you are right, they tend to let their guard down on Saturdays.

You and I just have different ideas of what constitutes a "hard-core" lefty.

There are no New Black Panther Party spokesmen or Spartacist league or ANSWER people on NPR even on Saturdays. It's just more mult-culti left wing of the Democratic Party feel good about yourself pablum.

Methadras said...

And yet still remain as hyper-leftard as they possibly can. The new politirati, The Leftard Ninjas.

Sofa King said...

NPR is new-age.

Quaestor said...

Robert Cook wrote:
We're not crumbling under the weight of any "Great Society" programs or thinking at all. We're collapsing as a result of the innate character of the corporate/captialist system.

You obviously don't know jack about the history of our current debacle or capitalism.

Firstly, in an unfettered (the co-called "laissez-faire") capitalist system a lender is in complete control of who he lends to and why. Who? Good credit risks, i.e. persons that have assets of sufficient value and liquidity which can assure repayment and/or a well-founded reputation of probity. Why? To make a profit. This country hasn't had laizzez-faire system in place for a long time. Some degree of state intervention in capital markets is tolerable, and might even be beneficial, since the Community Reinvestment Act and various Clinton-era executive orders pursuant to the "The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream" policy statement leaders have been forced to grant mortgage loans to first-time buyers with shaky financing and incomes. By artificially expanding the number of qualified buyers this policy had the unintended consequence of greatly expanding demand for homes, therefore causing home prices to rise far out of proportion to the natural demand (i.e. demand for homes from people who can actually afford to pay for them). The results are a housing bubble, which has burst, homeowners whose mortgages liabilities exceed the market value of the house, and investor holding mortgages with zero liquidity. None of this would have happened without NON-CAPITALIST intervention in and distortion of the market. Leftist always try to cage the market and make it deliver their dream world into reality, but the laws of market are as immutable as the laws of nature.

Robert Cook said...

Quaestor:

Wrong.

Seeing Red said...

Disney is right wing?


BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Seeing Red said...

Unfettered? The US? Since when? The 1800's? Not now.

YoungHegelian said...

@Robert Cook re Quaestor's post:

Open minded as always, are we, Robert?

Seeing Red said...

We're collapsing as a result of the innate character of the corporate/captialist system.



So did the USSR, Olde Europe now and Cuba.

LOLOLOLOL

traditionalguy said...

NPR is struggling. They now do 30 minutes pieces on the latest hard rock bands.

Trying to appear hip to the younger generations is hard to do...almost as hard as appearing conservative to lifelong intellectual snobs.

But you have to love the voices.

Quaestor said...

Robert Cook wrote:
We're not crumbling under the weight of any "Great Society" programs or thinking at all. We're collapsing as a result of the innate character of the corporate/captialist system.

Secondly, Obama is a shameless practitioner of so-called crony capitalism, which is not capitalism at all. In an unfettered capitalist system there is no need for an investor or entrepreneur to curry favor with political powers. Baring an act of God his enterprise will rise or fall on its own merits. Unfortunately political power is analogous to money, and has been since the dawn of civilization, so the mingling of politics and private enterprise has been a constant danger to sound capitalism. The best we can hope for is political interference and distortion to be kept to a minimum. Unfortunately we have Obama in power and an a politicized media unwilling to act as a watchdog, so there's no hope of cronyism being kept to a minimum.

Obama has been acting to distort our national economy in a number of ways. His so-called health care reform creates disincentives to competitiveness and abundance, so naturally we get higher health care costs and longer waits for diagnosis and treatment. Some reform.

Government Motors (formerly GM) was given a political mandate to build hybrid cars that cost more to own than conventionally powered vehicles. They sold 723 Volts last month. GM needs to sell 10,000 units a month to show a net profit on the model. Capitalists don't obey political mandates, they produce products that satisfy demand, else they go broke. Obama rescues GM mainly to benefit his benefactors in the UAW, then he forces GM to produce cars few people will buy. Now the UAW, GM's largest single stakeholder is going broke. Some rescue.

Obama's policies contribute to the rising costs of energy by making oil and coal more scarce through artificial impediments to mining and drilling in this country (while encouraging the same activities by other countries) and by funneling increasingly scarce capital into boondoggles like Solyndra which eat money and produce nothing. Some energy policy.

Quaestor said...

Seeing Red wrote:
Unfettered

Quoting myself: This country hasn't had laizzez-faire system in place for a long time.

Depending on the scholars one reads market interventionism in this country dates to either the FDR Administration or the Lincoln Administration, take your pick.

However, true unfettered capitalism has never existed because (quoting myself again) "political power is analogous to money".

Correction. "... leaders have been forced to grant mortgage loans to first-time buyers with shaky financing and incomes." should read "... lenders have been forced to grant mortgage loans to first-time buyers with shaky financing and incomes." Mea culpa.

Scott M said...

Mea culpa

I think the leaders/lenders thing was what RC had the problem with, don't you?

carrie said...

The children's shows on public television all have liberal agendas, it's just that most adults don't know that because they don't watch the children's shows on public television and just assume that kids' shows don't deal with "adult" issues. But watch Arthur for a while (make sure you don't get the episodes from the first few years when it didn't have an agenda). And reemember when "C" used to stand for cookies on Sesame Street--well it stands for carrots now.

Quaestor said...

Did I blunder into profundity?

Quaestor said...

And remember when "C" used to stand for cookies on Sesame Street--well it stands for carrots now.

Have they killed off Cookie Monster, or has it morphed into Carrot Monster?

Scott M said...

I think it's a stroll down Ridiculous Ave to start equating cookies with conservative and carrots with liberal.

Ideologies aside, if you decide you're going to have a character called Cookie Monster who has, for the better part of three decades, chomped down on as many cookies as he could lay his hand on, you simply remove him from the lineup. Kids see right through the "cookies are for sometimes" as well as they do sports leagues that never keep score where adults actually tell them, "each game is a tie".

Okay...that last bit was ideological, but cookies aren't any more pro-life than carrots are, and carrots are any more unrealistic about alternative energy production than cookies are.

Scott M said...

Please ignore the man behind the curtain as well as the obvious typos in the above comment :0

'sbeen plaguing me all day...

Kurt said...

Quaestor asked: "Have they killed off Cookie Monster, or has it morphed into Carrot Monster?"

A few years ago, Sesame Street made headlines when they had Cookie Monster declare "A cookie is a sometime food." If you watch the video, you'll see that they are promoting the idea that "fruit is an anytime food." (Just don't tell that to Dr. Mercola.)

The date on the video I linked to says 2010, but I thought it was of a piece with the incident previously linked to by homo Ĺ“conomicus above--where the re-released early episodes were declared inappropriate for today's youngsters.

Kurt said...

Actually, I was confused about the date. The video I linked to above was from 2005 (and it clearly stated that, though somehow I missed it). So the reissued episodes controversy was just a more recent chapter of the same nonsense.

viator said...

Don't worry George has plenty of money. NPR should hitch their wagon to Soros, a few quid for some pro.
Left wing propaganda - a new growth sector.

Joe Schmoe said...

It's definitely crosshairs. Cross hairs are just bad-tempered follicles.

Joe Schmoe said...

"would really like to see is depoliticizing NPR a little bit"

BWAH-HA-HA. Unless they fire 90% of their national correspondents, writers, and producers, it's still gonna be the same old lefty vanguard that it's always been.

To desire a culture change while lauding all the current staff is hamstringing this guy from the get-go. I say epic fail in the sense that he either has to clean house personnel-wise or everything's gonna stay the same. I suspect the incumbent employees don't think they're doing anything wrong; in fact, I'm pretty sure they're doing God's work. Or whatever secular figure/cause they substitute for a religion.

Joe Schmoe said...

If I ever had to get fired, having Oscar the Grouch come into my office/cube/work area and do the deed would be pretty sweet, though.

Alex said...

If Robert Cook considers NPR bland, I can imagine what gets his rocks off is something like "Workers World News" Or Pravda?

ken in sc said...

When I was still on active duty, I was commander of an aircraft maintenance squadron. Our officially assigned squadron chaplain—a very metro-type Catholic priest—told me that NPR was too conservative for his tastes. They accept support from corporations and such.

BTW, I use metro-type to indicate that you could not be sure of his orientation, but you could be pretty sure he was not anyone's real father.

ken in sc said...

P.S. I listen to NPR for the same reason as Kurt.

chrisnavin said...

It's the Robert Cook kiss of death.

chrisnavin said...

Obama doesn't practice "crony capitalism," it's a necessary function of attaching his principles onto the people who actually work and contribute and generate wealth and tax revenue.

If true Leftists have their way, you wouldn't have a free market anymore, and thus just a ruling group of increasingly ruthless people competing for the remains of the socialist/Communist apparatus.

Liberalism itself has backed into this corner, being associated as it is with commies/socialists/Marxist materialists and other causes like the flotsam at the NYC protests.

It can do much better, frankly. No more power for you until you get rid of the "power" theories, liberals. You don't deserve it.

Roux said...

I always hated Sesame Street... Not sure why because I loved the Muppet Show.

Saint Croix said...

Obama doesn't practice "crony capitalism,"

it's more like crony socialism

it's a necessary function of attaching his principles onto the people who actually work and contribute and generate wealth and tax revenue.

No. It's his belief that the government should take sides in the marketplace. He thinks he should reward his friends and punish his foes. GM gets money, he gets influence. That's the game. GE gets money, he gets influence. They corrupt each other as Obama tries to monopolize more and more industries.

What makes our economy go? Entrepreneurs and small business owners. That is pure capitalism in action. If you want capitalism to thrive, you oppose mergers and acquisitions and instead you divide power. You allow the various companies to compete, which ultimately benefits us all.

It's rather like federalism or the separation of powers. Monopoly is bad, either in the private sector or the public.

It's not the rich you have to watch out for, it's the powerful. And for idiots on the left who fail to see the power of the federal government, well, you're an idiot. I got nothing nice to say to you.

Obama's version of socialism is a stifling and huge bureaucracy that benefits stifled and huge corporations, who can afford to do the mountains of paperwork.

Small businesses that are just starting out cannot afford to compete and they go under. Or they stop hiring. And, geez, look at the unemployment rate.

Phil 3:14 said...

I'm a regular NPR listener. I'd say they play it down the center about 50% of the time. But eliminate they're liberal bias, no way. It is ingrained in their staffers and their core audience.

Locally, in Phx we have the "Changing America Desk " which seems to specialize in rolling their "R's ".

I think they believe they're doing news relevant AZ's Hispanic audience but they're basically to white, liberal sensibilities.

Trooper York said...

ironrailsironweights said.....
I love NPR because I know that Amy Goodman does not shave her cross hairs......and that's good.

Peter

Robert Cook said...

"If Robert Cook considers NPR bland...."

Do you actually argue that NPR is not bland and insipid, or that it is some sort of organ of radical left politics?

Hahahahaha!

If so, this just speaks to your own ignorance or radical right perspective, whichever may be the more fitting.

Kurt said...

Following up on the discussion about Sesame Street, I wonder how many folks saw this article yesterday.