As good ideas go, it’s difficult to top the idea of public broadcasting, and particularly Lyndon Johnson‘s creation of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the subsequent formation of NPR and PBS, and the proliferation of public broadcasting stations across the U.S.
For a small pittance of money from public coffers, the nation gets the massive advantage of working news networks dedicated to informing the public accurately, and great cultural preservation, including education of the very young.
For-profit broadcasting has been absolutely unable to equal quality programs on television like “Sesame Street,” or “Masterpiece Theatre,” or “American Masters,” or “American Experience. For-profit radio has nothing to equal “Morning Edition,” “All Things Considered,” “Prairie Home Companion,” or even “Car Talk.”
You know some politician is playing to the yahoos and anti-civilization types when he takes a swipe at schools, libraries, or public broadcasting.
So, we know Marco Rubio‘s questioning of funding for CPB is a swing for the foul territory, an appeal for ignorance, to ignorance and ignorants. ABC News, a rival of both NPR and PBS, reported the story with all its ironic drippings:
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., expressed worry this morning about broadcasting outlets that use taxpayer money to stay on the air.
But Rubio made his comments on NPR, a broadcasting outlet that uses taxpayer money to stay on the air.
“I do have concerns about spending money on public broadcasting,” Rubio told Diane Rehm during an hourlong Q&A on NPR.
NPR has been a source of criticism from congressional Republicans who view it as a liberal refuge that espouses its views courtesy of public funding. Although only 2 percent of NPR’s funding comes from government grants, the loss of federal funding would undermine the ability of NPR stations to pay for NPR programming, NPR says.
Rubio argued that private donations should support such an enterprise as NPR, and that plenty of outlets are available to house that ideology and format. He admitted, though, that he enjoys Rehm’s show and that NPR’s funding is low on the list of costs that should be cut.
A caller pointed out the irony of Rubio’s position, saying, “He’s spending an entire hour on the show today.”
Rubio countered that a half-century ago, a station like NPR might have been necessary, but “today there is no shortage of options” for news and opinion.
“I have 300 stations on my satellite radio,” Rubio boasted.
300 stations on his satellite — which most Americans cannot afford — and not a single station equal to the worst of NPR’s network.
Shame on Marco Rubio. Tighten your seatbelts, America, it’s going to be a bumpy election, with lots of appeals to ignorance and praise for doing less than the best.
Do you know where the word “yahoo” comes from? Rubio is one of the epitomes.
Now, here’s the trouble: Is he making this appeal in hopes of winning votes, in hopes of getting Mitt Romney’s attention for the vice president’s slot on the ticket? Or is he really just that anti-quality, anti-American? Bet he doesn’t like baseball or apple pie, either — we won’t even mention Mom.