They’re just straight up evil.
NPR is the only news media that consistently tells me the core news, why it’s important, and never “how I should feel about it”.
What about AP?
Is always telling me to donate and get all the cookies in the world.
I’m.canceling my dizney and Netflix and routing that to NPR.
Thats a great idea! We should evangelize that. That woukd be a great movement. Cancel one od your streaming services to suppport seasame street
Only around 15% of the PBS budget comes from the federal treasury via the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), thanks to decades of privatization. NPR’s budget is as little as 1% from the CBP.
Consequently, both networks have suffered from a creeping enshittification, with a rising tide of advertisement and ad-supported content taking over both networks and the forced sale of some of its most valuable assets (PBS licensing Sesame Street to Warner Brothers, for instance) to finance continued operations.
Like, by all means. Cancel your Netflix. Cancel Disney. Support public broadcasting. But this isn’t a solution in the long term, any more than cancelling Basic Cable for Netflix was a way to fix the fully privatized entertainment system. We’re still surrendering our social capital to private interests, bit by bit (or in this case by massive chunk).
This is a stab wound. We can patch it, but we shouldn’t mistake this as to anyone’s material benefit.
Make sure to list that as reason. If enough people drop Disney to fund NPR, Disney might buy a politician to do something about it.
The White House called for an end to federal funding for NPR and PBS in April, claiming that they “spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news.’” Trump also fired the CPB’s three Democratic board members, who refused to leave their posts. Trump sued them this week in an attempt to force them out.
Translation: they don’t regurgitate right wing talking points.
These people are disgusting.
They also educate and inform people. That’s a problem for the GOP. They don’t want the American people, ESPECIALLY low income people, to have access to free education and information that PBS and NPR provides. They need to ensure the population is stupid thus easier to control.
So America they’ve taken your medicade, they’ve taken the ability of a good portion of your country to be able to eat, they’re taking immigrants, tourists, or people that they don’t agree with to camps, they’re taking your education, they’re taxing you with tariffs, they have a gestapo, and they’ll be taking away more rights from Women and POC. I have to ask…how much longer until you start to get a little bit violent?
They also educate and inform people.
Eh. They are increasingly polluted by their private sponsors and corporate partners. I’ve given up on listening to NPR in the mornings because so much of it is very obviously native advertisement or propaganda (particularly bad in the immediate aftermath of Oct 7th, with broadcasters uncritically repeating IDF hoaxes like the “40 decapitated babies” line).
So America they’ve taken your medicade, they’ve taken the ability of a good portion of your country to be able to eat, they’re taking immigrants, tourists, or people that they don’t agree with to camps, they’re taking your education, they’re taxing you with tariffs, they have a gestapo, and they’ll be taking away more rights from Women and POC. I have to ask…how much longer until you start to get a little bit violent?
I got a “Blue Alert” on my phone not two days ago, thanks to a vigilante attacking an ICE agent. Dozens of armed cops were all over the Mayor’s Office yesterday because of a rumor of a Palestinian protest that never materialized. FFS, three different people tried to shoot the President in a two month span.
I don’t think the problem is a lack of violence. What Americans largely lack is coordination and institutional support. A thousand little lone wolves don’t a revolution make.
They are increasingly polluted by their private sponsors and corporate partners.
Gee, I wonder why they have those. Could it be because of the extreme cuts to their budget by conservatives?
Your apathy is part of the problem.
Hypothetically if you wanted your country to become impoverished within the next five decades, what sort of things would you do that are different to what the current administration is doing?
They don’t want the country to be impoverished, and it’s ridiculous to suggest that.
They just want the bottom 99.9% of the population to be impoverished. They’re already most of the way there.
looks at mississippi and alabama
it appears to work too
The only differences I can think of is not chickening out on the tariffs and forcing the interest rate lower to kick off runaway inflation.
I mean, technically there would be more direct measures, like using artillery to blow up infrastructure or destroying crop with flamethrowers.
Go on, centrists. Why was there no filibuster this time?
Rescission packages aren’t subject to the filibuster, only a simple majority is needed. Expect more of this.
Sounds like something democrats could have used during the biden administration. Did they?
Frankly, it’s starting to look like democrats always have an excuse. Have a majority? Oh shucky dern, we can’t pass what we ran on but never intended to pass because of the filibuster! WOOHOO! I mean, it really is unfortunate that we can’t do anything.
Don’t have a majority? There is always some reason you can’t filibuster! WOOHOO! I mean, it really is unfortunate that we can’t do anything. Donate to put us back into power that we will refuse to use!
Well a rescission package can only be used to cut spending, so it couldn’t have been used by the Democrats to pass new spending.
What do you think they should have used it to cut?
The military, the police, the prisons, ICE, TSA, DHS, CIA, NSA… any number of oppressive organizations that exist to protect the exalted status of capital.
Why would democrats ever defund any of those? They don’t even seriously dislike any of them.
That’s my point. Democrats don’t have the best interest of working people in their hearts.
I’m with you there but you could not have got even a simple majority of elected representatives to agree to that. It would have to be something that Democrats broadly support.
Isn’t that the point of this thread? That Democrats don’t support the working class?
I thought you were saying they were ineffective at enacting their agenda because they didn’t use rescission packages.
If we’re talking about what you just said I have no quarrel.
What do you think they should have used it to cut?
The funding for trump’s wall.
Yeah, they should have. Congress ended up doing the opposite, forcing him to continue funding. Democrats don’t have nearly the party unity that Republicans do around immigration, I think that’s why it keeps being leveraged as a wedge issue.
The main reason republicans are able to get better results from a filibuster than the democrats is republicans don’t give a shit about the consequences.
When there is a lapse of government funding it causes chaos in a lot of programs that tens of millions of people depend on. Even if it’s just a day, the government spends weeks preparing for it and when it’s over it’s not like flipping a switch and everything goes back to normal, there is a long recovery period. Even getting close to a lapse results in wasted effort preparing for the possibility which takes away from running the programs and harms people.
For republicans that’s an added benefit to a point, not something to be avoided so they will hold out until they get a large portion of what they want. Democrats have to weigh the pain and suffering from a lapse against getting concessions so their thresholds are different.
But as absentbird said, that doesn’t really apply here because rescission isn’t something that democrats are going to use often.
The main reason republicans are able to get better results from a filibuster than the democrats is republicans don’t give a shit about the consequences.
The democrats get the results they want from the filibuster. It blocks progressive legislation and that’s all it’s for.
You can filibuster anything if you have the will. The Democrats just don’t have any care to fight for anything but their pathetic jobs.
No, you can’t. Debate time is limited in the senate for a rescission package. There is no filibuster, neither a traditional talking one nor one where they just say they’re filibustering to prevent a vote.
I suppose someone could just talk and refuse to stop. They would be ruled out of order, and if they didn’t stop the Senate Sergeant at Arms would have them removed. If every democrat did that I guess that would hold things up a bit, but it’s not a filibuster and eventually the vote would proceed.
Better to be dragged out for standing up for what is right than to roll over and show your belly to the butcher.
Given who we’re taking about, I won’t hold my breath for it.
At this point I fear that it would be the best case scenario if all the Democrats were sniveling little controlled opposition weenies.
What if a lot of them are good people with the will, the energy, the means, and the awareness that now is their time to make history, and they are not because the writing on the wall (or the approaching shit tsunami, if you will) looks that much worse from the inside where they can see the machinations of this takeover in action long before it hits the news. And maybe they’ve heard some consistent believable inside rumors about the details of certain high profile suicides.
They sure seem to be the useless variety though.
Democrat answer: Filibusters are ‘not a good look’. We want to be seen as the party of reasonable adults who honestly want to work across party lines to help our constituents. We won’t vote to end the practice as it has a long history and tradition blah blah blah
Honest answer: We don’t give a single fuck about our constituents, the only people we are beholden to are the lobbyists who line our pocketbooks. It’s easier to control the narrative when all of the media corporations are owned by billionaires.
Nah. You’re not thinking like a politician. The real answer is, “this will be a PR disaster for them. LOL this is really goin to help my fundraising”
What if I’m unwilling to vote for a party willing to cooperate with nazis?
Then people who like the collaborationists will blame you when they lose and take it as a sign that they should collaborate even harder.
Of course, they take everything as a sign that they should collaborate even harder.
I really hate this administration.
Cool, so that pays for .001 of the national debt… Interest.
Who needs public broadcasting anyway, when you have Faux News and Sky.
Removed by mod
Haven’t they already used up their spending budget reconciliation bill for the year passing the BBB? Hopefully this will be filibustered to death then.
Edit: Nevermind, apparently rescission bills also bypass the filibuster.
If they just voted to kill it, there was no filibuster.
How else are you going to fund Elmo’s tax cut?
So sad… This also eliminates public weather alerts in rural areas.
Why do I feel like the Elmo Twitter hack was orchestrated by the Trump dictatorship to further sow hatred against public media and give another reason to defund it?
How long before user-generated content and alternative forms of social media like this site or like Matrix, PeerSuite, Mastodon, Pixelfed, PeerTube, and etc. are next in the crosshairs?
How would they take out a federated network? That’s kinda the whole point.
Force ISPs to block it or even go over the ISPs’ heads and block it at the national level? Hypothetically, if a fascist state wants any form of resistance wiped from the web, forcing ISPs to block it or blocking it at the national level would be a good way to go about that.
I just hope that doesn’t actually happen and it stays purely as a hypothetical in the US, but blocking at the ISP level or even at the national level is one way to take something out, that’s how dictatorships like North Korea censor their media, for example.
Removed by mod
