-------- Original Message --------
Subject: About the CPB, Republicans and Statism
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:46:48 -0600
From: Mike Blessing
To: [85 individuals]
7/26/2013 6:29 AM:
FYI: In addition to foundation money, tax dollars are also given to the CPB which runs PBS stations around the nation. The taxpayer is not asked whether he wishes to contribute. That should be stopped and we have the right to demand it.
Starting in 1994, the Republicans have been promising to do exactly this – defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting – during most if not all election seasons.
From 1994 to 2007, the Republicans held majorities in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate.
Yet the CPB never lost a penny in funding.
Thus, either the Republicans are so incompetent that they are unable to organize enough votes to defund the CPB while they hold legislative majorities . . .
OR
There are enough Republicans for whom this particular issue is nothing more than PR copy for their re-election campaigns – "red meat for the conservatives," soon to be forgotten after getting another term. Then when CPB's budget comes up for renewal, they find "reasons" to vote in favor of it.
I disagree that "we have no voice." We have plenty of voices. And we do have access to the media.
In these days of Blogspot, Wordpress and YouTube, media access for the common citizen keeps getting easier and easier.
In my judgement the causes of the Republican point of view not being disseminated merits an essay.
What exactly is the "Republican point of view" ?
There seems to be a misconception out there in GOP circles that the Republican Party is about free markets, Constitutionally-limited government, individual rights and public sector fiscal restraint.
Given the track records of John McCain, George W. Bush, George H.W. Bush and Richard Nixon, that can hardly be true. The federal government never shrunk much if any in terms on expense or intrusiveness under any of the administrations of the above presidents.
Even under "The Gipper" Ronald Reagan, the GOP's patron saint of the 20th Century, the expense and intrusiveness of Washington DC expanded greatly. Reagan talked a decent game, but never really walked the walk.
Nor did President-wannabe Romney shrink government at the state level while he was Governor of Massachusetts.
While Senator-wannabe Heather Wilson was in the U.S. House as a "representative" for New Mexico's 1st District, she enthusiastically supported the single biggest expansion of the welfare state in the "Oughts" of the 21st Century – Medicare Part D, signed into "law" by George W. Bush in 2003.
So why exactly should people who DO care about free markets, Constitutionally-limited government, individual rights and public sector fiscal restraint care in the slightest about the "Republican point of view" ?
He made his money through valuable capitalist methods: individual rights of privately owned property, voluntary trade, limited government and free markets. But in his basic premises he is wedded to the welfare state, which means the principle of unlimited government. In other words: statism.
I know the original comment was about Bill Gates, but this was and is also true of Mittens Romney, the GOP's 2012 presidential offering.
_______________________________________________________________________
Mike Blessing / http://mikewb1971.wordpress.com / Phone – 505-249-1248
Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should – you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer – what's the question?
"Government is the disease that masquerades as its own cure."
– Robert LeFevre
_______________________________________________________________________
FOR FURTHER REFERENCE
NOTES
- Approximate reading level – 9.1
- Reposted –
Copyright © 2013 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.
bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack
