Posted on 03/17/2008 5:10:14 AM PDT by shove_it
Imagine youre a typical NPR listener, tuning in as you sip your Starbucks Café Latte made with skim milk and a shot of cinnamon work the New York Times crossword puzzle, and think about how great it is that you dont have to stop for gas on your way to work this morning because you drive a Prius. Suddenly, youre jolted out of your comfortable morning routine by the unimaginable: a segment entitled Conversations with Conservatives.
Choking on your latte and misspelling pestiferous on your crossword, your head begins to spin as Rev. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Conventions Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, discusses the status of evangelical voters. But surely its just an anomaly. An early April Fools Day joke. Yeah, that must be it! And fortunately, it was only seven minutes.
But the next day, you hear Grover Norquist, founder of Americans for Tax Reform, talking about which fiscal policies appeal to Republican voters. And the day after that, radio talk show host and CNN personality Glenn Beck discusses core conservative values. And on the last day of February, you are treated to David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, blathering on about the challenges that Sen. John McCain faces when it comes to proving himself to the conservative base...snip...And if they dont want conservatives on NPR, thats fine too. Just send conservatives a refund for their portion of the taxes that support it.
Now thats progressive.
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
I'm sick to death having to support liberal "news" shows. Do we get tax dollars to put Rush or Hannity on? No. And they shouldn't either.
Excellent article! She nailed it!
Subject: Father/Daughter Talk
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and was very much in favor of "the redistribution of wealth." She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his. One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school. Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying. Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?" She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over." Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that Would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA." The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!" The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the Republican party."
This is yet another thing that pisses me off about the last 7 years. We had majorities in Congress, why didn't we kill tax funding for NPR?
It’s the only way liberals can survive, but sucking at the teat of the successful.
I’ve been calling it National Proletariat Radio for years now.
We call it "National Peoples' Radio" at my house.
“Welcome to the Republican party.”
Yeah. That’s a goodun. I saw it too.
And stop playing this tripe on Armed Forces Radio for 10+ hours a day!
all the folks back in the day who called themselves ‘Progressive’ were dyed in the wool commies.....
Now I read where Jacobs field in Cleveland will now be called ‘Progressive Field’ as the rat b@stard commie who owns Progressive insurance has paid for the naming rights....
‘Progressive’ is a poor name to use to take the LIBERAL stigma away from the Dims.....to me it is more Socialist/Pinko/Commie than calling them ‘liberal’.....
Most likely National Pervert Radio is only looking for cover when someone mentions their Stalinist bias.
I particularly enjoyed the conversation with Grover Norquist.
to paraphrase the old Tonto and Lone ranger joke, "What do you mean we, conservative?" What makes you think the "compasionate conservatism" typified by King George II has anything at all to do with true conservative values. Once the republicans got into power they showed that at heart they weren't any different from liberal democrats - both groups dispensing largesse from the taxpayers pockets with both hands.
We call it "National Peoples' Radio" at my house.
A friend of mine dispenses with the alphabet and calls it "National Lesbian Radio." I think that's cheating, but it has a certain ring to it.
Point. The GOP from 2001 on has been far more flamingly liberal than the Democrat party could have ever hoped to be. All we have to show for our efforts is a Democrat party that wants to out-liberal the GOP.
I never liked the term "compassionate conservatism." Conservatism needs no "modifiers." It is in itself compassionate.
Saving BUMP!
But but....When they were begging this past weekend, while actually showing pieces of an interesting show for a change, I was informed that they recieve “very little” government funding. Less than (insert small number here) per cent.
You don’t suppose they meant paid direct do you? And that the statement meant that their funding comes from various “foundations” which are in turn funded by tax dollars? Hmmmm.
The Air America success story in New England, one of the
blue-est areas of the country:
VERMONT:
WVAA 1070/1390 Burlington—GONE (now women’s talk radio)
WKVT 1490 Brattleboro—still on the air
NH: Never had an AAR station
MASS:
WKOX 1200/WXKS 1430 Boston—GONE (now La Nueva Rumba)
A couple small stations in Western MA (1240,1600)—still on
RI:
WHJJ 920 Providence—GONE (now conservative talk.
After ratings plummeted, the prog. director declared
“The Air America experiment is over.”)
CT:
WVAZ 1300 New Haven—GONE (now sports)
MAINE:
WLVP 870 Portland—GONE (now sports)
If liberal talk were done well, it would succeed. But maybe
the real reason it has failed is that liberals already
have their own network, and it’s taxpayer funded.
National PROGRESSIVE Radio.
Air America was given a chance to succeed in the free
marketplace but it failed. (And now they want a “fairness
doctrine” to force it on us—but it’s already on! NPR!)
Pam Meister says that if you want a Fairness Doctrine, be prepared for a LOT more conservative voices on
NPR and she opines that while liberals claim to be tolerant they don’t want to actually have to listen to another
viewpoint.
Jay Leno: “They say the purpose of Air America will be to balance out all the conservatives in the media, except, of course for NPR, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and the New York Times. Other than that. (He forgot Boston Globe, MSNBC,
Michael Moore, AlGore, Rolling Stone...)
I love good news on the radio on Monday morn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.