[pgyanke]

> "You aren't employing your critical thinking skills."

And you are? Read and learn...

> "This man clearly watches public television and listens to NPR. He finds them valuable and worthy of his financial support."

That isn't substantiated by the article. You don't seem to be the sort of person who has ever run a business. If you were, you would know that advertising isn't something you do based on political ideology. Your money isn't going to "support" an organization. You are spending your money to get the word out about your own goods and services. I would argue exactly the opposite to your own reasoning. In my business (financial planning), my best demographic is the Rush Limbaugh show and talk radio in general. I have advertised there. If I had more money to spend on advertising, there is a large population of my local neighbors who regularly listen to NPR. I'm not "supporting" them with advertising dollars, I'm reaching out to another segment of the population that may not listen to conservative talk radio and therefore haven't heard my ad. That's good marketing. Ignoring your customers simply because you disagree with their political philosophy is business suicide and patently unAmerican.

> "He may be a humane individual, but that he supports socialism with his money, does not make him a good American."

No, what makes him a good American is the fact that he is a dentist who seeks to expand his business, employ his neighbors and fosters a better community through a capitalist outreach and trickle-down economics. I'm sure he's very patriotic since he's obviously disgusted that his local PUBLIC station censors him and he is fighting back. You, on the other hand, are criticizing him for a background you do not know in market conditions you don't understand with insults that are more a product of image projection than reality.

[Carry_Okie]

Going for the stretch in your defense I see. It was you who stated that I was out of place here based upon an unsubstantiated assumption. Now you go brass ring in the same vein. Let's take a look at what was written, shall we? Said Rutherford: "I was a little incensed the station could run gay and lesbian coalition sponsorship spots — but I couldn't mention God in mine?" "Incensed" implies not only disgust but surprise, as if one should rationally expect any other kind of behavior our of an NPR station.

If I had more money to spend on advertising, there is a large population of my local neighbors who regularly listen to NPR. I'm not "supporting" them with advertising dollars, I'm reaching out to another segment of the population that may not listen to conservative talk radio and therefore haven't heard my ad.

No, you are supporting it, writing off the contribution, and rationalizing your lack of creativity in finding another way to support your local businesses accomplishing the same thing.

No, what makes him a good American is the fact that he is a dentist who seeks to expand his business, employ his neighbors and fosters a better community through a capitalist outreach and trickle-down economics.

That's a lot of assumptions. For all you know this guy could support nationalized health care. He certainly supports socialied radio communications. In supporting NPR in the name of "advertising" our dentist was also looking for a tax break, similar to the corporate communists who support public broadcasting in general. Believe me, the Ford Foundation, the MacArthur Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, Annenberg, Carnegie and the rest are NOT supporting public broadcasting for "charitable" purposes and they aren't doing it to sell trucks, publications, oil, or steel; they are doing it for ideological purposes destructive to the Constitution to inclucate a system where making money carries little risk to them. They do it for power and profit for their global investments that have sucked this country dry.

Further, buying "advertising" on public radio is fraudulent, becuause it is supposed to be a NOT for profit activity in order to qualify for the tax deduction. An unconstitutional IRS looks the other way because it's good for them. No, supporting public radio is tax-exempt influence buying, AUGMENTED BY TAX DOLLARS, and the "protagonist" in this story buys into it all when he gives them his money. You can't rationalize this by intent, because it is consequences that define accountability.

Ignoring your customers simply because you disagree with their political philosophy is business suicide and patently unAmerican.

Straw man. I never suggested he ignore his customers and he is now clearly alienating that same clientele with his comments, so your argument in his support fails the test of consistency.

You, on the other hand, are criticizing him for a background you do not know in market conditions you don't understand with insults that are more a product of image projection than reality.

You don't seem to be the sort of person who has ever run a business.

Look who's doing the projecting here? I have created real industrial products, patented them, developed the manufacturing process, built the machinery, managed regulatory compliance, and implemented production worldwide. I now own a business in the process of patenting a management method that will replace the need for regulatory government. It has been hand carried by a Senator (gratis, I might add, on the strength of its ideas alone) to every cabinet level secretary and to the Vice President.

You were saying?