So NPR was lying

When they said they would do just fine without tax payer dollars. Why do I say that? Well, it looks NPR is using tax payer dollars to hire lobbyists to get lobby congress for more tax payer dollars. For an organization that got all huffy that the peasants were pointing out tax payer subsidy of a partisan propaganda outlet like NPR and claimed they would do better without those tax payer subsidies, it sure looks like they are fighting hard to keep them in place now:

National Public Radio (NPR) is paying the lobbying firm Bracy, Tucker, Brown & Valanzano to defend its taxpayer funding stream in Congress, according to lobbying disclosure forms filed with the Secretary of the Senate. The taxpayer-funded radio network hired the firm in the second quarter of 2011 to work on issues regarding “funding for NPR and affiliate stations.”

It will remain unclear how much NPR is paying for these lobbying services until second quarter lobbying forms are filed. But before NPR hired the firm to represent it on funding issues, the network spent $131,666 in 2011’s first quarter on an in-house lobbyist.

NPR’s hiring of the lobbying firm comes in the wake of a public debate over whether the network should continue to receive taxpayer funds. Shortly after NPR was subjected to public humiliation due to the release of conservative Project Veritas’s sting videos, House Republicans voted to take away the network’s taxpayer funding in March. (The Senate, however, never passed a similar measure to defund NPR.)

In the Project Veritas videos, now-former NPR nonprofit foundation President Ron Schiller told people who he thought were representatives from a Muslim Brotherhood front group looking to donate $5 million to the network that NPR would be “better off” in the long term without taxpayer subsidies. He also attacked the Tea Party as racist and suggested that Jews control America’s newspapers.

Heh. Guess they weren’t completely honest there, huh? You don’t spend money lobbying congress – especially when the argument can be made you are using tax payer funding to get more tax payer subsidies, which you then will use to screw over the tax payers by supporting a party and an agenda that is usually seriously hostile to tax payers – if you think the tax payer subsidization isn’t a benefit.

What NPR was likely trying was to dismiss their critics, by pretending they didn’t need the loot congress was giving them, because they dammed well knew they could not seriously make the case they aren’t a bunch of partisan propaganda hacks, which would seriously impugn the whole idea of having the tax payer subsidize their propaganda. Hope they fall flat on their face. Congress shouldn’t be giving my confiscated income to people that then use that to promote an agenda that’s so vehemently hostile to me and the fact that I don’t want to live off of government handouts.

Comments are closed.

  1. Anonymous

    Alex,

    The only one lying is you. NPR never said it would… “do just fine without tax payer dollars.”

    I for one am all for making lobbying for hire illegal. It’s nothing but legalized bribery. But anytime some one dares to suggest this the Republicans scream bloody murder. I believe some the democratic party recently suggested people who receive government support be prohibited from lobbying but the Republicans cried.

    Thumb up 0

  2. JimK

    Actually, muir, you’re the liar here, and you owe Alex an apology

    The entire meaning of that letter is that they could get by without the “2%” they get from taxpayers. If that’s not true, then NPR’s MEdia Relations Director lied.

    BTW that took me 19 seconds to find on Google. Stop being an asshole just for the sake of it.

    Thumb up 0

  3. AlexInCT

    Muirgy, Jim already bitchslapped you with facts so let me tackle your other piece in that post:

    I for one am all for making lobbying for hire illegal.

    Really? Honestly truly? Or do you mean you want lobbying of the kind you don’t approve off banned? See because the two biggest lobbyist groups I can think off – unions and big business – are beholden to and completely in the pockets of democrats. If they also were banned from any form of lobbying or support of any kind, I would be quite happy to accept your suggestion to make lobbying illegal.

    It’s nothing but legalized bribery. But anytime some one dares to suggest this the Republicans scream bloody murder.

    Maybe because anytime someone suggests banning lobbying they usually are actually asking to ban only selected lobbying, and then only the kind of lobbying that affects republicans? Never the stuff that helps democrats…

    I believe some the democratic party recently suggested people who receive government support be prohibited from lobbying but the Republicans cried.

    Yeah, and he excluded all the usual suspects, including unions and other special interests beholden to democrats. I can’t blame republicans for crying. And I am certain the MSM would never point out that the democrats were selectively banning lobbying that benefits republicans, while keeping their own, or air any republicans pointing that out.

    Thumb up 0

  4. Anonymous

    So, out of curiosity, where is muirgeo currently rating on the “complete dick” scale? I say this not necessarily out of a “Ban him, ban him!” incentive, but more like when you’re waiting for something you know is going to happen in a movie but you just don’t know when…

    Thumb up 0

  5. JimK

    He’s getting there. Ever the eternal optimist (what? I AM SHUT UP) I hold out hope he’ll come around and be that honest Jiminy Cricket liberal that “keeps us all honest.”

    For real. I totes believe it could happen. Cereal, you guys, I’, totally cereal right now.

    Thumb up 0

  6. JimK

    He’s getting there. Ever the eternal optimist (what? I AM SHUT UP) I hold out hope he’ll come around and be that honest Jiminy Cricket liberal that “keeps us all honest.”

    For real. I totes believe it could happen. Cereal, you guys, I’, totally cereal right now.

    Thumb up 0

  7. Miguelitosd

    Maybe because anytime someone suggests banning lobbying they usually are
    actually asking to ban only selected lobbying, and then only the kind
    of lobbying that affects republicans? Never the stuff that helps
    democrats…

    Usually it’s “Ban all corporation’s ability to lobby!” But if you suggest that unions shouldn’t be able to either.. that’s somehow really bad.

    Thumb up 0

  8. muirgeo

    Fact ; NPR WOULD survive with out the grants. It’s not a lie… they would survive. But the O’keefe video Alex bought into was selectively edited to dupe people like Alex.
    Yes they would survive but that doesn’t mean they are saying the grants are not important.

    Okeefe lied and edited the raw video where Shiller explains they need the grants for small rural stations.

    Okeefe lied and edited the raw video where Shiller explains they need the grants for small rural stations.

    And here is Glenn Beck…GLENN BECK debunking oKeefe.

    Bottom line is you really have to be a ding bat to not like NPR’s programming. Hell I regularly here Libertarian economist from George Mason University and Cafe Hayek on there.’

    The problem really is as Stephan Colbert says, ” The facts have a decidedly liberal bias”. And if you really don’t care about the facts then I can see maybe you having a problem with NPR.

    Their public funding is totally insignificant to the budget…. there truth is very dangerous to corporate rulers.

    Thumb up 0

  9. muirgeo

    Then go ahead and ban me you little baby. I couldn’t give a shit if you’re not man enough to confront other view points. It’ll save me time and it’ll be funny to watch your comments numbers drop after I’m gone.

    Lee never threatened me the way you guys do and never threatened to ban me.

    Sounds like you have a lot of posters here who would be better off not hearing my naughty words either.

    Thumb up 0

  10. muirgeo

    To me all lobbying for hire should be banned and the only ones who I have seen put forth a serious bill were democratic politicians. And those bills never went anywhere.

    Thumb up 0

  11. JimK

    Okay. If you want to be a little cunt instead of being a reasonable adult, I’ll accomodate your request. By the way, you never apologized to Alex for lying and for generally being a pussy, so there’s always that note on which to end our relationship. You’re a pussy.

    Or you could stop being a cunt. Man up. Apologize for being wrong and move on.

    Your call. And BTW, that last straw they talk about? This is it.

    Thumb up 0

  12. richtaylor365

    Muirgeo, unwittingly of course, has provided us with some classic text book examples of liberal hysteria and failings:

    We have the random and uninformed ad hominem ,” Alex, you are a liar”, reminds me of an old lawyer joke (my wife is an attorney) ,”When the facts are against you-argue the law, when the law is against you-argue the facts, when both are against you-call the opposing counsel a schmuck”. Muirgeo has never tried using the facts or the law, he goes right to “Schmuck” out of habit.

    We have the oblivious stare in the face of a refutation:

    Actually, muir, you’re the liar here, and you owe Alex an apology

    Nope, I didn’t read that, and if I did, I am going to ignore it, didn’t happen.

    We have the petulant child lashing out uncontrollably over a perceived injustice:

    Then go ahead and ban me you little baby. I couldn’t give a shit if you’re not man enough to confront other view points.

    Bravo, that’s telling him, crusaders like yourself are always misunderstood.

    Here is the deal, it is obvious that you want to get banned, hence your behavior and out bursts, but when it happens (and people like myself have tried to warn you to clean up your act and comport yourself better) you are going to go away pouting, too stupid to realize that it was your own big mouth/failed intellect that got you there.

    Oh, and I just saw your cute little blog, shouldn’t it have been titled ,”A blank spot between my ears”?

    Thumb up 0

  13. AlexInCT *

    To me all lobbying for hire should be banned and the only ones who I have seen put forth a serious bill were democratic politicians. And those bills never went anywhere.

    Shorter Moogoo: ban only the lobbying I don’t like.

    Thanks for not disappointing.

    Thumb up 0

  14. Rann

    I think he really has been trying to get banned. He’d probably see that as a point of pride, something he can head back to his own blog and other liberal spaces to brag about (“Well, been banned from yet another Rethuglinazi blog for speaking truth to power!”), and he wouldn’t have to keep getting ripped apart for posting nothing but his weak flailings and links he got from said liberal spaces.

    Thumb up 0

  15. AlexInCT *

    Fact ; NPR WOULD survive with out the grants. It’s not a lie… they would survive.

    So you now are into the business of predicting the future? Cause NPR sure as hell seems to disagree with you when they decide to come out and spend a lot of money lobbying congress for more of that tax payer lucre you say they absolutely don’t need. BTW, I remember people telling me ACORN would also survive without tax payers paying for the left to use them to attack the very same tax payers, but they had to split up, rename themselves to hide the association, and get back on the tax payer’s teat to stay in business. Wait until we see the WI public unions go out of business once they are no longer to collude with the democrats to fleece the public. In general, you can immediately assume any left leaning organization sucking at the government’s teat would be in serious pain, if not doomed, simply on the basis that everything the left believes in and wants usually revolves other, far more successful and hard working people, to pay for it. Case in point the entire doomed system.

    But the O’keefe video Alex bought into was selectively edited to dupe people like Alex.

    Since the whole unedited video was released as well Moogoo, your weak ass attempt to pretend it was edited in a way to make NPR look bad, falls to pieces. NPR DID look bad because the NPR spokesmen were assholes, crooks, and creeps. These scumbags said exactly what O’Keefe’s video said they did. What angers you and the left about O’Keefe Moogoo, is that he has used the left’s own tactics to expose the sewage that the left is, but has so far been very successful at hiding from the world, because they controlled the media. Those days are gone, and for that people like you revert to the same old tactics: demonize the messenger so you don’t have to deal with the message. Good luck with that tactic.

    Okeefe lied and edited the raw video where Shiller explains they need the grants for small rural stations.

    \

    As I pointed out O’Keefe releases the entire video, so your attempt to make him look bad fails. And if the smaller NPR stations go belly up, all that’s left is NPR stations preaching to the choir: the big leftist controlled urban areas where the morons that depend on government handouts so far outnumber the sane people that NPR simply serves no real purpose anyway being there. The proof that the tax payer money would harm NPR badly is in the fact that even after they say they didn’t need it, they spend a fortune lobbying for the same or more. Period.

    Bottom line is you really have to be a ding bat to not like NPR’s programming.

    Actually all you have to do is listen to NPR to hear how biased it’s reporting is. And, man it is biased tripe. I have endured it. Many, many times. That’s unlike what you morons that say Fox News is a lying propaganda machine, while never listening to it, and constantly getting spoon fed lies from everything else passing itself off as a serious news organization in the MSM, do BTW. The dingbats are the people that listen to the propaganda and then pretend NPR is not a mouthpiece of the left using tax payer money to attack the same tax payers for feeling that they have been abuse enough.

    Hell I regularly here Libertarian economist from George Mason University and Cafe Hayek on there.’

    Hah! Bullshit. We have already had this argument once and I schooled you then, but let me do it again. Libertarian isn’t conservative, first of all. And whatever they put on to pretend they are trying to let you hear both sides of the stories usually involves 15 leftists spouting the lies and one guy that they pick because he sounds like a radical loon, so they can then dismiss them in toto.

    That’s unlike Fox News where you get quite a few liberals talking for the left, like Juan Williams, for example. Remember him? He used to be at that “unbiased” NPR until they let him go, in a scandalous way and followed by a scandal that cost the people that did that their job as a PR stunt to hide the bias, for daring to walk of the liberal plantation. NPR is just another one of the many leftist dominated propaganda shitholes that now finds itself needing to pretend to be unbiased because the American people have had enough of the left’s abuses at their dime. You keep pretending it is nt so all you wat, but the facts speak quite differently.

    Thumb up 0

  16. Rann

    By the way, I’d just like to take a moment to remind everyone that when NPR was first starting up, a lot of the stations they bought out/took over, essentially kicking off the air so that they could have their channels, were actually small, locally-owned ethnic channels?

    They seem to have almost deliberately targeted things like Cuban-American stations and whatnot, perhaps hoping to have a ready-made sympathetic audience of people with high melanin contents. The fact that this denied these people their culture’s programming (and often their only outlet for news about how things were going at home) means that, even from inception, NPR was already fucking over the little guy it claims to champion and speak for/to. There’s few things more Democrat than that.

    Thumb up 0

  17. AlexInCT *

    Then go ahead and ban me you little baby. I couldn’t give a shit if you’re not man enough to confront other view points

    Jim, he is egging you to ban him, while pretending you are doing so because he has an alternate view point, and not because he brings nothing of value, but only the same usual tired and failing personal attack tactics the left has been using for the last 3 or 4 decades, to silence any opposition, to the discussion, as usual, and I urge you not to do so.

    Moogoo’s best value to us at this site are his insane posts attacking the messenger and flailing around to pretend he has a better message. Seriously, you can not do better than make a point, then have Moogoo come here and in a post trying to repudiate your point, making your point for you as he constantly does. I know many here tire of the insane tactic of having to deal with someone that remains immune to logic, facts, any kind of reason, and believes arguments are won by impugning the character of the opposition, but Moogoos insanity is pure gold, and I love ripping him.

    Don’t deny me of the pleasure of my own insane lefty stalker, man.

    Thumb up 0

  18. Rann

    Moogoo’s best value to us at this site are his insane posts attacking the messenger and flailing around to pretend he has a better message.

    Eh. I dunno, man. I sort of agree with you and sort of don’t. It is nice to have someone so insane and pathetic to smack around, but after awhile it just becomes tiresome. You sort of want to move the game’s setting from “Easy” to “Medium”.

    This blog deserves a better class of liberal. And… Muirgaboy isn’t gonna give it to is.

    Thumb up 0

  19. richtaylor365

    This blog deserves a better class of liberal. And… Muirgaboy isn’t gonna give it to is.

    I’m with Rann on this one. Presenting different points of view is essential to a free society and a sane, articulate, rational, reasoned liberal offering those different views would only make the blog better, but Muirgeo is not up to the task, sorry.

    I think what Jim did was fair, the ball is now in his court, man up,apologize, then we can get on with business. and if he does this then he can come back and annoy us some more. But to think that he will provide any intellectual debate aside from being the resident punching bag? When pigs fly.

    Thumb up 0

  20. JimK

    Alex, I get it, but I’m sort of with rich & rann here. I absolutely want to see liberals – real ones, not moonbats – debate here. That would fucking rock. In fact if I knew any who’d be willing, I’d ask ‘em to write main page posts. I’d LOVE to see legit back & forth like that.

    Moo is…just kind of a dick. And he knows I am loathe to ban, so he’s pushing me just so he can claim troll victory if I do it. But he’s such an asshole. All the time. I dunno.

    PLEASE, GOD, GODS, MOTHER GAIA AND/OR WHOEVER THE HELL ELSE, SEND US AN HONEST, INTELLECTUAL LIBERAL AND PREFERABLY IN THE CLASSIC SENSE OF THE WORD, NOT A DU.MOVE ON DOUCHENOZZLE, AND ESPECIALLY NOT SOMEONE WHO THINKS THAT MOVE ON IS TOO RIGHT WING.

    (Heh, the spell-check doesn’t know “douchenozzle.”)

    Thumb up 0

  21. AlexInCT *

    What I am also trying to prevent gentlemen is Moogoo claiming we “banned” him because we couldn’t deal with his brilliance – and we all know that’s what he will claim, no matter what – and making us look bad. Seriously, every time I think I have had enough of him, he comes along and drops such a huge gem for us – making my point far better than any post could ever – and that alone makes me feel his ramblings are worth it.

    I am in the minority here, so I will go on with whatever you all feel is better for the site, but damn I am gonna miss the easy debunking of someone as mentally challenged as Moogoo =is.

    Thumb up 0

  22. JimK

    What I am also trying to prevent gentlemen is Moogoo claiming we “banned” him because we couldn’t deal with his brilliance – and we all know that’s what he will claim, no matter what

    Yeah. This is exactly what he’s going to say – and probably think – regardless of his own shitty, juvenile and idiotic behavior.

    And that is why I haven’t pulled the trigger on him. While I’d love to see him either grow up or be gone, I am loathe to let the little pissant claim ANY sort of “moral” victory, however Pyrrhic it would be.

    Thumb up 0

  23. richtaylor365

    and making us look bad.

    In a hundred years of trying he could never make any one here look bad.

    Jim gave him the perfect out, if he wants to grow up, get some manners (and a better argument) then he can stay, but an apology is his ticket back. Seems more than generous if you ask me.

    Thumb up 0