Gay Patriot Header Image

ABC’s Maverick Stossel: Cut Off PBS Funding

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 9:03 am - August 12, 2005.
Filed under: Movies/Film & TV

Once again, ABC News reporter John Stossel proves why more conservative voices are needed in the so-called “mainstream media.”

Privatize PBS - RealClearPolitics.com

He starts off with a bang….

My cable company made me a remarkable offer: They want to add a new channel to my cable subscription — and you will pay for it. The channel will have liberal news, highbrow entertainment and a variety of educational programming.

Sounds insane, and yet the channel isn’t new. It’s called PBS.

But then he gets to the real point.

Republicans should stop dithering about reducing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting’s subsidies and eliminate them altogether. Of course, when anyone suggests cutting the PBS budget, people say, “they’re trying to kill ‘Sesame Street’!” But “Sesame Street” is big business and would survive in any environment. “Children’s programming that has an audience does not need taxpayer subsidies,” says Jacob Sullum of Reason. “Noggin, which is more ‘commercial-free’ than PBS stations, carries 12 hours of kids’ shows (including two different versions of ‘Sesame Street’) every day. Parent-acceptable children’s programming can also be seen on Nickelodeon, the Disney Channel and ABC Family.”

Stossel ends the piece with a quote from David Boaz, the author of “Libertarianism: A Primer.”

“We wouldn’t want the federal government to publish a national newspaper, writes Boaz, “why should we have a government television network and a government radio network? If anything should be kept separate from government and politics, it’s the news and public affairs programming that Americans watch. When government brings us the news — with all the inevitable bias and spin — the government is putting its thumb on the scales of democracy. It’s time for that to stop.”

To me, the most important point is also at the end: PBS, on the other hand, is broadcasting by bureaucracy. This is not a good thing. We should have separation of news and state.

Separation of news and state. That should be the new mantra for conservatives. Sounds like the great title for a blog, too.

-Bruce (GayPatriot) – gaypatriot2004@aol.com

Rafael Palmeiro and Jim McGreevey

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 8:41 am - August 12, 2005.
Filed under: Gay Politics

I have always been a David Letterman fan. But as he gets older, I actually think he is becoming funnier, more creative, and much more intelligent in his humor than Jay Leno. In fact, I have begun TiVO’ing both shows and comparing them. There is no doubt that Leno is ripping off some of Letterman’s stuff. But I digress…

Last night, in an homage to Johnny Carson… , Paul Shaffer donned the “Great Karnak” hat and lifted the envelope to his forehead.

Shaffer: “The answer is Rafael Palmeiro and Jim McGreevey.”

Letterman: “Rafael Palmeiro and Jim McGreevey……”

Shaffer: “Is there an echo in here?” (Tonight Show traditionalists would have loved it!!!) “Yes, Rafael Palmeiro and Jim McGreevey. I shall now reveal the question.”


Shaffer (ripping open the envelope and pulling out a piece of paper): “And the answer is….. Name two guys who lied about what they stuck in their ass.”

I think I busted a gut last night…..

-Bruce (GayPatriot) – gaypatriot2004@aol.com

Related Story – McGreevey Retrospective: No Big Whoop – BoiFromTroy

Malkin Update on 9/11 Fund Scandal by NJ Democrats

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 5:57 am - August 12, 2005.
Filed under: War On Terror

As a follow-up to my posting on this subject a few days ago, NJ Democrats Manipulated Post-9/11 Security, Michelle Malkin has an awesome column about the Democrats’ 9/11 Slush Fund.

For the past four years, Democrats have ceaselessly attacked Republicans for “exploiting” the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
When President Bush showed his support for rescue workers at Ground Zero, Democrats cried “exploitation!”
When the Bush administration launched a long-overdue global war on terror, Democrats cried “exploitation!”
When Bush signed the Patriot Act, Democrats cried “exploitation!”
When Republicans held their national convention in New York City last year, Democrats cried “exploitation!”
And when Karl Rove gave a speech to New York conservatives pointing out the Democrats’ passive counterterror strategy, Democrats cried “exploitation!”
But when an investigative reporter exposes Democrats raiding federal homeland security grants and turning 9/11 money into a party slush fund, where, oh where, are all the indignant liberal watchdogs to protest such clear and unconscionable political exploitation?

-Bruce (GayPatriot) – gaypatriot2004@aol.com