smittyoneeach's Journal: "merely the latest proof that NPR is a taxpayer-funded sandbox for liberals."

See How NPR Hacks Up Testy Interview with Ted Cruz
NPR is just another taxpayer-funded "abortion".

How dare they be consistent!

[damn_registrars]

They have to trim interview broadcasts for any politician; democrat, republican, or otherwise, to meet the FCC regulations. This is particularly important when a campaign is going on, as they can be fined for providing a candidate with too much air time.

If you want to read - and I know you aren't a fan of that - the full interview, NPR has it posted for your viewing pleasure [npr.org].

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

You play "the pretend game" well.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

You're the one propagating another fact-free conspiracy here, friend. But who am I to stop you from again pretending to be an expert on something that you proudly don't use?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Are you contending that NPR didn't edit Ted Cruz?

Re:

[damn_registrars]

I already said that for broadcast they trimmed it to meet FCC requirements. I gave you the link to the full transcript that goes much longer than what was broadcast. They did not do anything different for him than for any other politician.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I don't believe you.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

I don't believe you.

So then, as has happened many times before, it is your faith against the actual facts. You are again choosing to avoid the facts because they don't suit your agenda. You can do that if you want, but you won't be able to get anywhere with you argument that way when you are presenting it to anyone who didn't start off with an anti-NPR agenda.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I don't think you use the word "fact" in any traditional, objective, the-fear-of-the-Lord-is-the-beginning-of-Wisdom way.
I think you play games of verbal chess to manage your issues.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

It appears you have convinced yourself of that only because the facts I present are not "facts" that support your preconceived assumptions about the world. I provide actual citations and sources for my facts, you support your "facts" with - at most - partisan blog entries. The one manipulating the notion of fact is you, not me. I'm willing to bet you didn't even click the link to the full interview, and furthermore than you won't as it challenges the central statement of this JE of yours and you can't ha

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I think you're pretty much a crapflooder.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

I think you're pretty much a crapflooder.

It certainly is an awful thing of me to bring actual facts to an argument, isn't it? It really ruins your aspirations of having a fact-free echo chamber when I show up and actually try to discuss the matter in a factual manner.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Saith Crapflooder.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

I know that the facts here are likely very uncomfortable for you, as they counter your argument. But brushing them off as "crap" just because you don't like them doesn't help you. Similarly your labelling me as a "crapflooder" - just for presenting factual information - is just as disconnected from reality as when you call the Lawnchair Administration (or any member of it) a "commie".

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Commie crapflooder.

Re:

[damn_registrars]

Aww, you're adorable when you have nothing left to say!

Safe

[stoolpigeon]

This is a little off topic.

I keep seeing people saying the governments number one job is to keep people safe. When did they decide that? I've always thought that their number one job ought to be to keep people free. I really don't want safety at any cost.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Probably around the time when the territory where Maslo's First Pyramid had been built was overrun by Conan and a Cimmerian horde, government morphed into a protection racket. We want government to regulate utilities, products, provide emergency services, and bomber fleets.
Not content with all that, government wants to expand into managing your health & the weather.
Homo bureaucratus is a fearful piece of work, indeed.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Freedom is a subset of safety. You can't have Freedom without reasonable levels of Safety. Just ask the people of Liberia, the world's most corrupt government. They tried to have freedom without safety, but when the rubber meets the road, you can't even get the police to respond to an emergency call without a bribe.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I guess I think you mean "security" by safety. I saw firsthand in Afghanistan that, if there isn't basic security, the economy pretty much devolves to banditry.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

I'm not entirely sure I understand the difference in terms, but yes.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Physical security vs. the lower stress of feeling safe.

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Does not one imply the other?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

It's a lot easier for the government to lie about the latter.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Funny how you keep saying that government is different from anything else. If you don't like it, you can change it, it is just another sector of the market under majority rule.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

So, this week you're not offering your pseudo-Calvinistic argument about the impossibility of change?

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Yeah, it is possible that it's impossible. We just won't know until we try, eh?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

No no no no no: Tea Partiers are fools, I thought, according to you.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Yeah, so? That's their right, isn't it?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

You're shifting the question of the variability of the human experience to one of natural rights.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

How's that?

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Thread?

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Well, until the mass murders start happening every freakin' week anyway.

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Murders happen. Are you referring to the splashy, media amplified ones?

Re:

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Yep. Hard to pretend the country is secure with that crap going on.